Re: Python 3 reviewers

[Pablo Estrada]

I'm not a committer, but willing to help review and

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018, 8:54 PM Holden Karau  wrote:

> So I've been hesistant to do large chunks of Python 3 reviews for the same
> reason I've been hesistant to do large chunks of Python 3 work (on the
> commit side seems to move more slowly than the devs), but I suppose that
> does become somewhat of a self fulfilling prophecy. I'll dedicate some more
> cycles to helping with the reviews :)
>
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Ahmet Altay  wrote:
>
>> Thank you Holden for doing this work. I agree with Robert's comment. I
>> know there are a few folks working on this now (you, @luke-zhu and
>> @cclauss). Perhaps you could do python 3 related code reviews within that
>> group. I would be happy to chime in and review some chunks as well.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Robert Bradshaw 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'd really like to see Python 3 support sooner rather than later, and
>>> have been reviewing some (simple) PRs in this direction. As long as
>>> they're broken up into small enough chunks, feel free to send some my
>>> way.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Holden Karau 
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi Y'all,
>>> >
>>> > I'm trying to make some progress on Python 3 support for Beam but I'm
>>> having
>>> > a bit of difficulty finding people with review bandwidth. Are there any
>>> > committers with time to spare who would be willing to work on this? If
>>> not
>>> > no worries I'll refocus my efforts elsewhere :)
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> >
>>> > Holden :)
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau
>
-- 
Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback

Re: Python 3 reviewers

[Holden Karau]

So I've been hesistant to do large chunks of Python 3 reviews for the same
reason I've been hesistant to do large chunks of Python 3 work (on the
commit side seems to move more slowly than the devs), but I suppose that
does become somewhat of a self fulfilling prophecy. I'll dedicate some more
cycles to helping with the reviews :)

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Ahmet Altay  wrote:

> Thank you Holden for doing this work. I agree with Robert's comment. I
> know there are a few folks working on this now (you, @luke-zhu and
> @cclauss). Perhaps you could do python 3 related code reviews within that
> group. I would be happy to chime in and review some chunks as well.
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Robert Bradshaw 
> wrote:
>
>> I'd really like to see Python 3 support sooner rather than later, and
>> have been reviewing some (simple) PRs in this direction. As long as
>> they're broken up into small enough chunks, feel free to send some my
>> way.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Holden Karau 
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Y'all,
>> >
>> > I'm trying to make some progress on Python 3 support for Beam but I'm
>> having
>> > a bit of difficulty finding people with review bandwidth. Are there any
>> > committers with time to spare who would be willing to work on this? If
>> not
>> > no worries I'll refocus my efforts elsewhere :)
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Holden :)
>> >
>> > --
>> > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau
>>
>
>


-- 
Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau

Re: Python 3 reviewers

[Ahmet Altay]

Thank you Holden for doing this work. I agree with Robert's comment. I know
there are a few folks working on this now (you, @luke-zhu and @cclauss).
Perhaps you could do python 3 related code reviews within that group. I
would be happy to chime in and review some chunks as well.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Robert Bradshaw 
wrote:

> I'd really like to see Python 3 support sooner rather than later, and
> have been reviewing some (simple) PRs in this direction. As long as
> they're broken up into small enough chunks, feel free to send some my
> way.
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Holden Karau 
> wrote:
> > Hi Y'all,
> >
> > I'm trying to make some progress on Python 3 support for Beam but I'm
> having
> > a bit of difficulty finding people with review bandwidth. Are there any
> > committers with time to spare who would be willing to work on this? If
> not
> > no worries I'll refocus my efforts elsewhere :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Holden :)
> >
> > --
> > Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau
>

Re: [DISCUSS]: Beam 2.3.0 release archetypes missing mobile gaming examples

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Agree with Ahmet. As we agreed about the Beam release pace, Beam 2.4.0 is
planned next month, so it's not so far and it would be the good timing to add 
this.

Regards
JB

On 02/23/2018 01:24 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> In my opinion waiting for the 2.4.0 release makes sense, since there is a plan
> to cut 2.4.0 release soon and this is examples and not a core function. In the
> meantime, we could add a notice to the website warning users about this issue
> and suggest them to use the previous release for trying out these examples.
> 
> Ahmet
> 
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Yifan Zou  > wrote:
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> We stopped copying the mobile gaming examples into maven archetypes after
> merging Java8 examples to "mian" Java examples. So, we're not able to run
> those pipelines via creating a maven projects since those files are not
> included.
> 
> To solve this problem, we could:
> 
>   * 2.3.1 point ct with fix for archetypes.
>   * Wait for 2.4.0 release with fix.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> BEAM-3735
> 
>  is 
> filed
> to track this issue.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Regards.
> Yifan
> 
> 

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [DISCUSS]: Beam 2.3.0 release archetypes missing mobile gaming examples

[Lukasz Cwik]

+1 to Ahmet's suggestion, I would add it as a permanent piece of
information for the 2.3.0 release notes as well.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Ahmet Altay  wrote:

> In my opinion waiting for the 2.4.0 release makes sense, since there is a
> plan to cut 2.4.0 release soon and this is examples and not a core
> function. In the meantime, we could add a notice to the website warning
> users about this issue and suggest them to use the previous release for
> trying out these examples.
>
> Ahmet
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Yifan Zou  wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> We stopped copying the mobile gaming examples into maven archetypes after
>> merging Java8 examples to "mian" Java examples. So, we're not able to
>> run those pipelines via creating a maven projects since those files are not
>> included.
>>
>> To solve this problem, we could:
>>
>>- 2.3.1 point ct with fix for archetypes.
>>- Wait for 2.4.0 release with fix.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> BEAM-3735
>>  is
>> filed to track this issue.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards.
>> Yifan
>>
>
>

Re: Python 3 reviewers

[Robert Bradshaw]

I'd really like to see Python 3 support sooner rather than later, and
have been reviewing some (simple) PRs in this direction. As long as
they're broken up into small enough chunks, feel free to send some my
way.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Holden Karau  wrote:
> Hi Y'all,
>
> I'm trying to make some progress on Python 3 support for Beam but I'm having
> a bit of difficulty finding people with review bandwidth. Are there any
> committers with time to spare who would be willing to work on this? If not
> no worries I'll refocus my efforts elsewhere :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Holden :)
>
> --
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau

Re: [DISCUSS]: Beam 2.3.0 release archetypes missing mobile gaming examples

[Ahmet Altay]

In my opinion waiting for the 2.4.0 release makes sense, since there is a
plan to cut 2.4.0 release soon and this is examples and not a core
function. In the meantime, we could add a notice to the website warning
users about this issue and suggest them to use the previous release for
trying out these examples.

Ahmet

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Yifan Zou  wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> We stopped copying the mobile gaming examples into maven archetypes after
> merging Java8 examples to "mian" Java examples. So, we're not able to run
> those pipelines via creating a maven projects since those files are not
> included.
>
> To solve this problem, we could:
>
>- 2.3.1 point ct with fix for archetypes.
>- Wait for 2.4.0 release with fix.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> BEAM-3735
>  is
> filed to track this issue.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Regards.
> Yifan
>

[DISCUSS]: Beam 2.3.0 release archetypes missing mobile gaming examples

[Yifan Zou]

Greetings,

We stopped copying the mobile gaming examples into maven archetypes after
merging Java8 examples to "mian" Java examples. So, we're not able to run
those pipelines via creating a maven projects since those files are not
included.

To solve this problem, we could:

   - 2.3.1 point ct with fix for archetypes.
   - Wait for 2.4.0 release with fix.

Any thoughts?

BEAM-3735
 is
filed to track this issue.

Thanks.

Regards.
Yifan

Python 3 reviewers

[Holden Karau]

Hi Y'all,

I'm trying to make some progress on Python 3 support for Beam but I'm
having a bit of difficulty finding people with review bandwidth. Are there
any committers with time to spare who would be willing to work on this? If
not no worries I'll refocus my efforts elsewhere :)

Cheers,

Holden :)

-- 
Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau

Re: Jenkins build is still unstable: beam_PostCommit_Java_ValidatesRunner_Spark #4249

[Kenneth Knowles]

Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3729 about this Spark
ValidatesRunner breakage. We might want to roll back the pipeline options
change and then roll forward a revised version where we run this.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:32 AM, Apache Jenkins Server <
jenk...@builds.apache.org> wrote:

> See  ValidatesRunner_Spark/4249/display/redirect?page=changes>
>
>

Re: Jenkins job beam_PreCommit_Python_MavenInstall” still fails

[Alexey Romanenko]

Thank you Pablo for fixing this so quickly!

WBR,
Alexey

> On 21 Feb 2018, at 18:11, Pablo Estrada  wrote:
> 
> Thank you Kenn! And my apologies to everyone for causing this trouble.
> Best
> -P.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 9:08 AM Kenneth Knowles  > wrote:
> Thanks for the info on this. I went ahead and merged it since it had good 
> test coverage and was a simple change to fix the build.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Pablo Estrada  > wrote:
> Hello all!
> As outlined in BEAM-3720, this is due to my adding Gauge metrics without 
> adding support for the portability framework around the same time that the 
> direct runner was swapped. Please don't despair. PR 
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/4719 
>  fixes this, and hopefully will be 
> merged soon.
> Best
> -P.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:52 AM Ismaël Mejía  > wrote:
> For info, this issue is tracked and the fix is in progress:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3720 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  > wrote:
> > I would wait a feedback from the original author of the commit.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> > Le 20 févr. 2018, à 16:42, Alexey Romanenko  > > a
> > écrit:
> >>
> >> Yes, I switched back to  BundleBasedDirectRunner as default direct runner
> >> on current master and now it passes.
> >> So, my question was rather if we need to revert this or someone, who aware
> >> of this change, can take a look and fix it properly?
> >>
> >> WBR,
> >> Alexey
> >>
> >> On 20 Feb 2018, at 16:20, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < j...@nanthrax.net 
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes it seems to be related to the change on the Python direct runner.
> >>
> >> Did you try to revert the change to see if it fixes the build ?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >> Le 20 févr. 2018, à 16:13, Alexey Romanenko < aromanenko@gmail.com 
> >> > a
> >> écrit:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> Jenkins job “ beam_PreCommit_Python_MavenInstall” has been constantly
> >>> failing for last 3 days.
> >>>
> >>> Last successful build (#3052) has been produced at Feb 16:
> >>>
> >>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PreCommit_Python_MavenInstall/lastSuccessfulBuild/
> >>>  
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> “ git bisect" says that the first commit, when it started to fail, was
> >>> 56081686bf7926b65a18dc7c7d2c4e4a9fd265e9
> >>>
> >>> Could someone take a look on this or I need to create new Jira for this?
> >>>
> >>> WBR,
> >>> Alexey
> >>
> >>
> >
> -- 
> Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback 
> -- 
> Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback

Jenkins build is back to normal : beam_Release_NightlySnapshot #693

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Problems with BigQueryIO in python using 2.3.0

[Vilhelm von Ehrenheim]

Hi all!
Not sure if I'm missing something or if this is a bug. I get the following
error in BigQueryIO when using
`beam.io.gcp.bigquery.parse_table_schema_from_json()`:

```
  File
"/home/while/git_repos/motherbrain-cyrano/python_sdk/venv/lib/python2.7/site-packages/apache_beam/io/gcp/bigquery.py",
line 249, in parse_table_schema_from_json


fields = [_parse_schema_field(f) for f in json_schema['fields']]

  File
"/home/while/git_repos/motherbrain-cyrano/python_sdk/venv/lib/python2.7/site-packages/apache_beam/io/gcp/bigquery.py",
line 236, in _parse_schema_field


schema = bigquery.TableFieldSchema()

AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'TableFieldSchema'
```

This was working in previous versions.

Regards,
Vilhelm von Ehrenheim