Re: [Proposal] Apache Beam Event's Calendar

+1 to the calendar... Thanks,Ron On Friday, January 26, 2018, 2:27:34 PM PST, Griselda Cuevas wrote: Ok, so given that the proposal seem to have traction I'll proceed as follows:  - I'll give all PMC members owner rights to the calendar, so they can edit and

Re: Eclipse support

Cool thanks Daniel. Thanks,Ron On Friday, January 26, 2018, 1:31:17 PM PST, Daniel Kulp wrote: We do have some documentation at: https://beam.apache.org/contribute/eclipse/ But it doesn’t really work anymore.  I submitted a PR:

Re: [Proposal] Apache Beam Event's Calendar

Ok, so given that the proposal seem to have traction I'll proceed as follows: 1. I'll give all PMC members owner rights to the calendar, so they can edit and add events. 2. I'll share the calendar with the dev@ and user@ lists 3. I'll investigate how to add the calendar to the

Re: Eclipse support

We do have some documentation at: https://beam.apache.org/contribute/eclipse/ But it doesn’t really work anymore. I submitted a PR: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/4502 to use as a starting point to try and get things running in Eclipse again, but it’s not completely there yet. That

Re: [DISCUSS] State of the project: Feature roadmap for 2018

1) Instead of enabling it easier to write features I think more users would care about being able to move their pipeline between different runners and one of the key missing features is dynamic work rebalancing in all runners (except Dataflow). Also, portability is meant to help make a crisp line

Re: [DISCUSS] State of the project

I also think that at a high level the success of Beam as a project/community and as a piece of software depends on having multiple viable runners with healthy set of users and contributors. The pieces that are missing to me: *User-focused comparison of runners (and IOs)* +1 to Jesse's. Automated

Re: [DISCUSS] State of the project

Etienne, for the cross runner coherence, the portability framework is attempting to create an API across all runners for job management and job execution. A lot of work still needs to be done to define and implement these APIs and migrate runners and SDKs to support it since the current set of

***UNCHECKED*** Re: Samza Runner

Regarding merging directly to master, I agree that the code itself is probably just as OK as our other runners were when they joined master. So we should watch the rest of the bits from https://beam.apache.org/contribute/feature-branches/ here is how I think things are: [ ] Have at least 2

Re: [DISCUSS] State of the project

Hi all, Does anyone have comments about my point about dev coherence across the runners? Thanks Etienne Le 22/01/2018 à 16:16, Etienne Chauchot a écrit : Thanks Davor for bringing this discussion up! I particularly like that you listed the different areas of improvement and proposed to

Build failed in Jenkins: beam_PostRelease_NightlySnapshot #5

See Changes: [shashank] fix serialization error in BigQueryIO's DynamicDestinations [shashank] correct side input check in BigQueryIO DynamicDestination for pull [iemejia] [BEAM-3432] Remove

Re: Great work closing PRs for 2.3.0 release

You are welcome ! Again: team work ! ;) Thanks to all ! Regards JB On 01/26/2018 09:57 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Cleanup done on my side - and thanks JB to have caught one in the night for > me. > Thanks for the heads up, it seems it is easy to forget PR on github ;). > > > Romain

Re: Great work closing PRs for 2.3.0 release

Cleanup done on my side - and thanks JB to have caught one in the night for me. Thanks for the heads up, it seems it is easy to forget PR on github ;). Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog

Jenkins build is back to stable : beam_Release_NightlySnapshot #664

See