Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-11-30 Thread P. Taylor Goetz 
Erik is correct, that is the right branch. It was initially unmodified, but I 
just merged the initial pull request so others are open to create pull requests 
against that branch now.

-Taylor

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Erik Weathers  
> wrote:
> 
> Hugo,
> 
> This appears to be the branch:
> 
>   - https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/beam-runner
> 
> - Erik
> 
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Hugo Da Cruz Louro 
> wrote:
> 
>> I somehow missed this email … I would like to contribute to this effort as
>> well. Please keep me posted.
>> Thanks.
>> 
>>> On Oct 19, 2016, at 8:51 AM, Satish Duggana 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> +1, waiting for that. :)
>>> Currently,there are API changes going on in Beam. It seem they plan to
>> get
>>> that done by the end of 2016.
>>> 
>>> ~Satish.
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Bobby Evans >> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 +1 - Bobby
 
   On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 10:30 AM, Arun Mahadevan <
 ar...@apache.org> wrote:
 
 
 +1
 
 On 10/19/16, 8:58 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
 
> If there are no objections, I’d like to create the feature branch and
 push what I have so far. I’ve not had too much time lately to work on
>> it,
 but other’s have expressed interest in contributing so I’d like to make
>> it
 available.
> 
> -Taylor
> 
> 
>> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Bobby Evans >> 
 wrote:
>> 
>> +1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find
 time to do it any time soon. - Bobby
>> 
>>  On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana <
 satish.dugg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Taylor,
>> I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
>> earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start
>> with
>> existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a
>> way
>> that these can be replaced with new APIs.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Satish.
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz 
 wrote:
>> 
>>> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it
>> offers
 the
>>> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
>>> 
>>> -Taylor
>>> 
 On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik 
 wrote:
 
 Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
 primitives ?
 -roshan
 
 
> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> 
> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top
>> of
> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature
>> branch
>>> for
> that work if there are others who are interested in getting
 involved. We
> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
> 
> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed
 during
> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one
 of
> our main branches.
> 
> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a
 proposal
> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature
>> branch
>>> for
> group collaboration.
> 
> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
> 
> -Taylor
 
>>> 
>> 
> 
 
 
 
 
 
>> 
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-11-23 Thread Erik Weathers 
Hugo,

This appears to be the branch:

   - https://github.com/apache/storm/tree/beam-runner

- Erik

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Hugo Da Cruz Louro 
wrote:

> I somehow missed this email … I would like to contribute to this effort as
> well. Please keep me posted.
> Thanks.
>
> > On Oct 19, 2016, at 8:51 AM, Satish Duggana 
> wrote:
> >
> > +1, waiting for that. :)
> > Currently,there are API changes going on in Beam. It seem they plan to
> get
> > that done by the end of 2016.
> >
> > ~Satish.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Bobby Evans  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1 - Bobby
> >>
> >>On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 10:30 AM, Arun Mahadevan <
> >> ar...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On 10/19/16, 8:58 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> >>
> >>> If there are no objections, I’d like to create the feature branch and
> >> push what I have so far. I’ve not had too much time lately to work on
> it,
> >> but other’s have expressed interest in contributing so I’d like to make
> it
> >> available.
> >>>
> >>> -Taylor
> >>>
> >>>
>  On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Bobby Evans  >
> >> wrote:
> 
>  +1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find
> >> time to do it any time soon. - Bobby
> 
>    On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana <
> >> satish.dugg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>  Taylor,
>  I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
>  earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start
> with
>  existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a
> way
>  that these can be replaced with new APIs.
> 
>  Thanks,
>  Satish.
> 
>  On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz 
> >> wrote:
> 
> > I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it
> offers
> >> the
> > most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
> >
> > -Taylor
> >
> >> On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
> >> primitives ?
> >> -roshan
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top
> of
> >>> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
> >>> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature
> branch
> > for
> >>> that work if there are others who are interested in getting
> >> involved. We
> >>> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
> >>>
> >>> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed
> >> during
> >>> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one
> >> of
> >>> our main branches.
> >>>
> >>> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a
> >> proposal
> >>> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature
> branch
> > for
> >>> group collaboration.
> >>>
> >>> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
> >>>
> >>> -Taylor
> >>
> >
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-11-23 Thread Hugo Da Cruz Louro 
I somehow missed this email … I would like to contribute to this effort as 
well. Please keep me posted.
Thanks.

> On Oct 19, 2016, at 8:51 AM, Satish Duggana  wrote:
> 
> +1, waiting for that. :)
> Currently,there are API changes going on in Beam. It seem they plan to get
> that done by the end of 2016.
> 
> ~Satish.
> 
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Bobby Evans 
> wrote:
> 
>> +1 - Bobby
>> 
>>On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 10:30 AM, Arun Mahadevan <
>> ar...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> On 10/19/16, 8:58 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
>> 
>>> If there are no objections, I’d like to create the feature branch and
>> push what I have so far. I’ve not had too much time lately to work on it,
>> but other’s have expressed interest in contributing so I’d like to make it
>> available.
>>> 
>>> -Taylor
>>> 
>>> 
 On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Bobby Evans 
>> wrote:
 
 +1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find
>> time to do it any time soon. - Bobby
 
   On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana <
>> satish.dugg...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
 
 Taylor,
 I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
 earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with
 existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way
 that these can be replaced with new APIs.
 
 Thanks,
 Satish.
 
 On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz 
>> wrote:
 
> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers
>> the
> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
> 
> -Taylor
> 
>> On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
>> primitives ?
>> -roshan
>> 
>> 
>>> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
>>> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
>>> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch
> for
>>> that work if there are others who are interested in getting
>> involved. We
>>> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
>>> 
>>> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed
>> during
>>> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one
>> of
>>> our main branches.
>>> 
>>> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a
>> proposal
>>> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch
> for
>>> group collaboration.
>>> 
>>> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
>>> 
>>> -Taylor
>> 
> 
 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-10-19 Thread Satish Duggana 
+1, waiting for that. :)
Currently,there are API changes going on in Beam. It seem they plan to get
that done by the end of 2016.

~Satish.

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Bobby Evans 
wrote:

> +1 - Bobby
>
> On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 10:30 AM, Arun Mahadevan <
> ar...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>  +1
>
> On 10/19/16, 8:58 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
>
> >If there are no objections, I’d like to create the feature branch and
> push what I have so far. I’ve not had too much time lately to work on it,
> but other’s have expressed interest in contributing so I’d like to make it
> available.
> >
> >-Taylor
> >
> >
> >> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Bobby Evans 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find
> time to do it any time soon. - Bobby
> >>
> >>On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana <
> satish.dugg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Taylor,
> >> I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
> >> earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with
> >> existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way
> >> that these can be replaced with new APIs.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Satish.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers
> the
> >>> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
> >>>
> >>> -Taylor
> >>>
>  On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik 
> wrote:
> 
>  Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
>  primitives ?
>  -roshan
> 
> 
> > On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> >
> > I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
> > Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
> > contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch
> >>> for
> > that work if there are others who are interested in getting
> involved. We
> > did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
> >
> > Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed
> during
> > development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one
> of
> > our main branches.
> >
> > I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a
> proposal
> > document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch
> >>> for
> > group collaboration.
> >
> > Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
> >
> > -Taylor
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-10-19 Thread Bobby Evans 
+1 - Bobby 

On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 10:30 AM, Arun Mahadevan  
wrote:
 

 +1

On 10/19/16, 8:58 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:

>If there are no objections, I’d like to create the feature branch and push 
>what I have so far. I’ve not had too much time lately to work on it, but 
>other’s have expressed interest in contributing so I’d like to make it 
>available.
>
>-Taylor
>
>
>> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Bobby Evans  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> +1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find time to 
>> do it any time soon. - Bobby
>> 
>>    On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Taylor,
>> I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
>> earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with
>> existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way
>> that these can be replaced with new APIs.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Satish.
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:
>> 
>>> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers the
>>> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
>>> 
>>> -Taylor
>>> 
 On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik  wrote:
 
 Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
 primitives ?
 -roshan
 
 
> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> 
> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch
>>> for
> that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We
> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
> 
> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during
> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of
> our main branches.
> 
> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal
> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch
>>> for
> group collaboration.
> 
> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
> 
> -Taylor
 
>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-10-19 Thread Arun Mahadevan 
+1

On 10/19/16, 8:58 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:

>If there are no objections, I’d like to create the feature branch and push 
>what I have so far. I’ve not had too much time lately to work on it, but 
>other’s have expressed interest in contributing so I’d like to make it 
>available.
>
>-Taylor
>
>
>> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Bobby Evans  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> +1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find time to 
>> do it any time soon. - Bobby
>> 
>>On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Taylor,
>> I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
>> earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with
>> existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way
>> that these can be replaced with new APIs.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Satish.
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:
>> 
>>> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers the
>>> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
>>> 
>>> -Taylor
>>> 
 On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik  wrote:
 
 Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
 primitives ?
 -roshan
 
 
> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> 
> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch
>>> for
> that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We
> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
> 
> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during
> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of
> our main branches.
> 
> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal
> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch
>>> for
> group collaboration.
> 
> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
> 
> -Taylor
 
>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-10-19 Thread P. Taylor Goetz 
If there are no objections, I’d like to create the feature branch and push what 
I have so far. I’ve not had too much time lately to work on it, but other’s 
have expressed interest in contributing so I’d like to make it available.

-Taylor


> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Bobby Evans  wrote:
> 
> +1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find time to 
> do it any time soon. - Bobby
> 
>On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> Taylor,
> I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
> earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with
> existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way
> that these can be replaced with new APIs.
> 
> Thanks,
> Satish.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:
> 
>> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers the
>> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
>> 
>> -Taylor
>> 
>>> On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
>>> primitives ?
>>> -roshan
>>> 
>>> 
 On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
 
 I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
 Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
 contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch
>> for
 that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We
 did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
 
 Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during
 development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of
 our main branches.
 
 I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal
 document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch
>> for
 group collaboration.
 
 Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
 
 -Taylor
>>> 
>> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-09-19 Thread Bobby Evans 
+1 on the idea.  I would love to contribute, but I doubt I will find time to do 
it any time soon. - Bobby 

On Friday, September 16, 2016 12:05 AM, Satish Duggana 
 wrote:
 

 Taylor,
I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with
existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way
that these can be replaced with new APIs.

Thanks,
Satish.

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:

> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers the
> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
>
> -Taylor
>
> > On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik  wrote:
> >
> > Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
> > primitives ?
> > -roshan
> >
> >
> >> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> >>
> >> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
> >> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
> >> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch
> for
> >> that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We
> >> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
> >>
> >> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during
> >> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of
> >> our main branches.
> >>
> >> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal
> >> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch
> for
> >> group collaboration.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
> >>
> >> -Taylor
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-09-15 Thread Satish Duggana 
Taylor,
I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs
earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with
existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way
that these can be replaced with new APIs.

Thanks,
Satish.

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:35 AM, P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:

> I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers the
> most flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.
>
> -Taylor
>
> > On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik  wrote:
> >
> > Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
> > primitives ?
> > -roshan
> >
> >
> >> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
> >>
> >> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
> >> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
> >> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch
> for
> >> that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We
> >> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
> >>
> >> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during
> >> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of
> >> our main branches.
> >>
> >> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal
> >> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch
> for
> >> group collaboration.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
> >>
> >> -Taylor
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-09-15 Thread P. Taylor Goetz 
I'm open to change, but yes, I started with core storm since it offers the most 
flexibility wrt how Beam constructs are translated.

-Taylor

> On Sep 15, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Roshan Naik  wrote:
> 
> Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
> primitives ?
> -roshan
> 
> 
>> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:
>> 
>> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
>> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
>> contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch for
>> that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We
>> did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
>> 
>> Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during
>> development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of
>> our main branches.
>> 
>> I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal
>> document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch for
>> group collaboration.
>> 
>> Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
>> 
>> -Taylor
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-09-15 Thread Roshan Naik 
Good idea. Will the Beam API be implemented to run on top Storm Core
primitives ?
-roshan


On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz"  wrote:

>I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of
>Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can
>contribute. To that end I¹d like to propose creating a feature branch for
>that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We
>did that a while back when storm-sql was originally developed.
>
>Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during
>development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of
>our main branches.
>
>I¹d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal
>document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch for
>group collaboration.
>
>Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?
>
>-Taylor

[DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

2016-09-15 Thread P. Taylor Goetz 
I’ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of Storm and 
would like to open it up so others in the community can contribute. To that end 
I’d like to propose creating a feature branch for that work if there are others 
who are interested in getting involved. We did that a while back when storm-sql 
was originally developed.

Basically, review requirements for that branch would be relaxed during 
development, with a final, strict review before merging back to one of our main 
branches.

I’d like to document what I have and future improvements in a proposal 
document, and follow that with pushing the code to the feature branch for group 
collaboration.

Any thoughts? Anyone interested in contributing to such an effort?

-Taylor


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail