I've copied this failing test into my client, and it passes for me. I can't
reproduce the failure.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 6:34 PM Luke Cwik wrote:
> +dev +Brian Hulette +Reuven
> Lax
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:21 AM Paolo Tomeo wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I think the method
Thanks Luke.
Thanks for pointing that out.
I am new to Beam contribution community.
I would appreciate if you can point me or tag someone of the contributing
members who are working on Beam SQL feature, so that we can have a
discussion.
My view is BEAM-9825 is more about set operations, which
+dev +Brian Hulette +Reuven Lax
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:21 AM Paolo Tomeo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think the method AvroUtils.toBeamSchema has a not expected side effect.
> I found out that, if you invoke it and then you run a pipeline of
> GenericRecords containing a timestamp (l tried with
Yes, that's the plan for release images. I had a PR[1] merged several days
ago, and need to make change again as the default settings changed.
I will add validation tasks with details to release guide as well.
The other question is, how easy would it be for a release manager to
> accidentally
There is a PythonDocker Precommit test running for PRs with Python changes.
It seems running well.[1]
Max, can you please give me a link so I can check more details? Do other
images with different Python versions fail as well?
1. https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PreCommit_PythonDocker_Commit/
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:08 PM Ahmet Altay wrote:
> Nam, this looks better. At least links are working, and the website
> visually looks similar and generally in good shape. I think there are still
> issues. For example, I do not see any of the images (e.g. the beam logo on
> top left is
Nam, this looks better. At least links are working, and the website
visually looks similar and generally in good shape. I think there are still
issues. For example, I do not see any of the images (e.g. the beam logo on
top left is missing.)
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:11 PM Brian Hulette wrote:
>
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:49 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:03 PM Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 4:46 PM Hannah Jiang
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I guess I assumed there was some reason we needed "lightweight images"
in our tests (because
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:03 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 4:46 PM Hannah Jiang
> wrote:
>
>> I guess I assumed there was some reason we needed "lightweight images" in
>>> our tests (because licenses take up a lot of space IIRC), but maybe not.
>>> Can you elaborate on the
Welcome, Tyson!
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:15 PM Rui Wang wrote:
> Welcome!
>
> -Rui
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020, 3:13 PM Brian Hulette wrote:
>
>> Welcome Tyson!
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:54 PM Ahmet Altay wrote:
>>
>>> Welcome!
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:06 PM Hannah Jiang
>>>
Added a comment on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19967
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:57 PM Ahmet Altay wrote:
> Would it be worth filing this as an infra ticket?
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:29 PM Kyle Weaver wrote:
>
>> Slight correction.. Jira to Github links are back. Github to
Welcome!
-Rui
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020, 3:13 PM Brian Hulette wrote:
> Welcome Tyson!
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:54 PM Ahmet Altay wrote:
>
>> Welcome!
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:06 PM Hannah Jiang
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Welcome to the community!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 2:45 PM
Welcome Tyson!
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:54 PM Ahmet Altay wrote:
> Welcome!
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:06 PM Hannah Jiang
> wrote:
>
>> Welcome to the community!
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 2:45 PM Tyson Hamilton
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Beam Community,
>>>
>>> This is just a simple
I left a comment on the PR [1]. I think the reason all of the website
content is not being tracked as file renames is because there was a series
of commits that created files in the new directory, and then one commit
that deleted the old directory. If there were a single commit with all of
the
Would it be worth filing this as an infra ticket?
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:29 PM Kyle Weaver wrote:
> Slight correction.. Jira to Github links are back. Github to Jira links
> (which were only recently added) are not being added.
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 7:20 PM Kyle Weaver wrote:
>
>>
+1 for the automations. I agree with concerns related to #4. Auto closing
issues is not a good experience. A person goes through the work of
reporting an issue. This might very well be their first contribution.
Automatically closing these issues with no human comments might make the
reporter feel
Welcome!
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:06 PM Hannah Jiang wrote:
> Welcome to the community!
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 2:45 PM Tyson Hamilton wrote:
>
>> Hello Beam Community,
>>
>> This is just a simple 'Hello' to introduce myself. I'm a Software
>> Engineer at Google and have worked with
+Valentyn Tymofieiev +Hannah Jiang
-- in case they have relevant information.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:35 PM Maximilian Michels wrote:
> Hi,
>
> has anyone noticed the Python 3.7 Docker container fails to build? I
> haven't been able to build the Python 3.7 container, neither locally nor
>
+1, I was actually thinking about this just the other day. PortableRunner
should require job_endpoint to be set, and we can have a nice error message
directing the explicit use of FlinkRunner for the old behavior.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:50 AM Kyle Weaver wrote:
> > Could the error message
Hi,
has anyone noticed the Python 3.7 Docker container fails to build? I
haven't been able to build the Python 3.7 container, neither locally nor
on Jenkins.
I get:
17:48:10 > Task :sdks:python:container:py37:docker
17:49:36 The command '/bin/sh -c pip install -r
> Could the error message suggest switching to FlinkRunner (and/or other
runners that start a job server for you)? Then it seems like the breakage
would only be a minor annoyance.
Definitely.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:49 PM Brian Hulette wrote:
> Could the error message suggest switching to
Could the error message suggest switching to FlinkRunner (and/or other
runners that start a job server for you)? Then it seems like the breakage
would only be a minor annoyance.
Brian
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:32 AM Kyle Weaver wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Currently, when running a pipeline that has
+1 for automation.
Regarding #4, what about adding the constraint that this rule only applies to
issues that are incomplete and require more information from the reporter?
Unfortunately it would require a human to triage issues to determine this and
apply an appropriate label. Triage should
Hi all,
Currently, when running a pipeline that has the options
runner=PortableRunner and job_endpoint unset, the Python SDK spins up a
Dockerized Flink job server [1]. This is problematic because the
PortableRunner can be used by any portable runner. So for example, a Spark
runner user was
Hi guys,
I'm Nam - from the responsible team of Apache Beam website migration. I am
pleased to answer some of the questions here.
@aizhamal: Thanks for informing to the community. :)
@altay, @robertwb: Yes. there is a problem with the staged version at the
moment. We didn't expect some
Agree I think this all sounds good except for 4.
I like the idea of using automation to help tame the backlog of jiras, but
I worry that 4 could lead to a bad experience for users. Say they file a
jira and maybe get it assigned, and then watch as it bounces all the way
down to closed as obsolete
+1 to more automation.
I'm in favor of all but 4, I think it's quite common for issues to be
noticed but not worked on for 60+ days. Most of the time when a developer
files an issue they either (1) are working on it right now or (2) are
filing it away because it's something they're not working
27 matches
Mail list logo
