Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

Thanks, Davor! On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:10 PM Davor Bonaci wrote: > The IP clearance document has been filed into Foundation records, and is > currently under review. No further action necessary, unless we hear back. > > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Henning Rohde > wrote: > >> Thanks a

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

The IP clearance document has been filed into Foundation records, and is currently under review. No further action necessary, unless we hear back. On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Henning Rohde wrote: > Thanks a lot, Davor! Much appreciated. > > Thanks, > Henning > > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

Thanks a lot, Davor! Much appreciated. Thanks, Henning On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:26 AM Davor Bonaci wrote: > ETA: weekend. > > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:35 AM Henning Rohde wrote: > >> RESULT: the vote passed with only +1s! Thanks you all for the kind

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

ETA: weekend. On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:35 AM Henning Rohde wrote: > RESULT: the vote passed with only +1s! Thanks you all for the kind > comments. > > The only pending item is the IP clearance form (draft: > https://web.tresorit.com/l#nUkKlgi3cBYxYAOyhCMXIw >

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

RESULT: the vote passed with only +1s! Thanks you all for the kind comments. The only pending item is the IP clearance form (draft: https://web.tresorit.com/l#nUkKlgi3cBYxYAOyhCMXIw

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

Thanks Davor! I filled out the form to the best of my ability and placed it here (avoiding attachments on the list): https://web.tresorit.com/l#nUkKlgi3cBYxYAOyhCMXIw

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1! I, for one, could not be more excited about our glorious portable future. On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 6:03 PM Henning Rohde wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Now that the remaining issues have been resolved as discussed, I'd like to > propose a formal vote on accepting the Go SDK

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding) Fantastic to see another language being used in this space and the learnings that will come from bringing another language to the SDK. On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:25 PM, Willy Lulciuc wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Great work! > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding) Great work! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > The process has to be done by an officer or member. Can you help us with > this, Davor? > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:14 PM Robert Bradshaw > wrote: > >> On Tue, May

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

Always happy to help. I'm sure JB is as well, others too! Please draft/collect any relevant data -- thanks! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > The process has to be done by an officer or member. Can you help us with > this, Davor? > > On Tue, May 22,

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

The process has to be done by an officer or member. Can you help us with this, Davor? On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:14 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 2:42 PM Davor Bonaci wrote: > > >>* Robert mentioned that "SGA should have probably

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 2:42 PM Davor Bonaci wrote: >>* Robert mentioned that "SGA should have probably already been filed" in the previous thread. I got the impression that nothing further was needed. I'll follow up. > Please just follow:

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

> > * Robert mentioned that "SGA should have probably already been filed" > in the previous thread. I got the impression that nothing further was > needed. I'll follow up. > Please just follow: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/. Simple. Quick. Perhaps relevant: I saw some golang

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (enthusiastic and binding) Really excited to see another data point in the model with a third language, and thank you for fleshing this out to a full SDK. Good to go from my perspective. On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:19 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > +1 (binding) > Congratulations

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding). Great news! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:49 AM Chamikara Jayalath wrote: > +1 (non-binding). Great to know that our third SDK will be > released/supported officially. > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:38 AM Eugene Kirpichov > wrote: > >>

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding). Great to know that our third SDK will be released/supported officially. On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:38 AM Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > +1! > > It is particularly exciting to me that the Go support is > "portability-first" and does everything in the proper

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1! It is particularly exciting to me that the Go support is "portability-first" and does everything in the proper "portability way" from the start, free of legacy non-portable runner support code. On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:32 AM Scott Wegner wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > >

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding) Having a third language will really force us to design Beam constructs in a language-agnostic way, and achieve the goals of portability. Thanks to all that have helped reach this milestone. On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:19 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > +1 (binding) >

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding) Congratulations to the team! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Alan Myrvold wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > Nice work! > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 9:18 AM Pablo Estrada wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> Very excited to see this! >> >> On Tue, May

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding) Nice work! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 9:18 AM Pablo Estrada wrote: > +1 (binding) > Very excited to see this! > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 9:09 AM Thomas Weise wrote: > >> +1 and congrats! >> >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Rafael

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding) Very excited to see this! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 9:09 AM Thomas Weise wrote: > +1 and congrats! > > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Rafael Fernandez > wrote: > >> +1 ! >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:54 AM Lukasz Cwik

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 and congrats! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Rafael Fernandez wrote: > +1 ! > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:54 AM Lukasz Cwik wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 6:16 AM Robert Burke wrote: >> >>> +1

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 ! On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:54 AM Lukasz Cwik wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 6:16 AM Robert Burke wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> I'm looking forward to helping gophers solve their big data problems in >> their language of choice,

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding) On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 6:16 AM Robert Burke wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > I'm looking forward to helping gophers solve their big data problems in > their language of choice, and runner of choice! > > Next stop, a non-java portability runner? > > On Tue, May 22,

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding) I'm looking forward to helping gophers solve their big data problems in their language of choice, and runner of choice! Next stop, a non-java portability runner? On Tue, May 22, 2018, 6:08 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > +1 (binding) > > This is great. Feels like

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding) This is great. Feels like a phase change in the life of Apache Beam, having three languages, with multiple portable runners on the horizon. Kenn On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 2:50 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Go SDK brings new language support for a

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding) Go SDK brings new language support for a community not well supported in the Big Data world the Go developers, so this is a great. Also the fact that this is the first SDK integrated with the portability work makes it an interesting project to learn lessons from for future languages.

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (non-binding), I've had a chance to work with the SDK and it's pretty neat to see Beam add support for a language before the most of the big data ecosystem. On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Henning, > > SGA has been filed for the entire

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

Hi Henning, SGA has been filed for the entire project during the incubation period. Here, we have to check if SGA/IP donation is clean for the Go SDK. We don't have a lot to do, just checked that we are clean on this front. Regards JB On 22/05/2018 06:42, Henning Rohde wrote: Thanks

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding) While this is the third language for Beam, I believe it's the first new one since Beam began. Including this in Beam will be a nice milestone for the project. Reuven On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 9:43 PM Henning Rohde wrote: > Thanks everyone! > > Davor -- regarding

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

Thanks everyone! Davor -- regarding your two comments: * Robert mentioned that "SGA should have probably already been filed" in the previous thread. I got the impression that nothing further was needed. I'll follow up. * The standard Go tooling basically always pulls directly from github, so

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding) I just want to check about SGA/IP/Headers. Thanks ! Regards JB On 22/05/2018 03:02, Henning Rohde wrote: Hi everyone, Now that the remaining issues have been resolved as discussed, I'd like to propose a formal vote on accepting the Go SDK into master. The main practical

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1 (binding), with the following caveats: * [before closing the vote] Completion of IP clearance process, as we've been requested. It is easier to do it than having to argue why it is not necessary. * [at any time, possibly later] Figuring out the release mechanics. Great work; across the board!

Re: [VOTE] Go SDK

+1! So excited to have gotten to this point -- congrats to all. I've been excited to do some reviews of the Go SDK since becoming a committer; really happy about this. On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 6:03 PM Henning Rohde wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Now that the remaining issues have