I just called a vote on this. I don't think we really need a shepherd if there's enough interest for a vote to pass.
rb On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:00 AM Cody Koeninger <c...@koeninger.org> wrote: > According to > > http://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html > > the shepherd should be a PMC member, not necessarily the person who > proposed the SPIP > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't know an official answer, but conventionally people who propose > the > > SPIP would call the vote and "shepherd" the project. Other people can > jump > > in during the development. I'm interested in the new API and like to > work on > > it after the vote passes. > > > > Thanks, > > Wenchen > > > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 7:25 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks! I'm all for calling a vote on the SPIP. If I understand the > >> process correctly, the intent is for a "shepherd" to do it. I'm happy to > >> call a vote, or feel free if you'd like to play that role. > >> > >> Other comments: > >> * DeleteData API: I completely agree that we need to have a proposal for > >> it. I think the SQL side is easier because DELETE FROM is already a > >> statement. We just need to be able to identify v2 tables to use it. I'll > >> come up with something and send a proposal to the dev list. > >> * Table create/drop/alter/load API: I think we have agreement around the > >> proposed DataSourceV2 API, but we need to decide how the public API will > >> work and how this will fit in with ExternalCatalog (see the other > thread for > >> discussion there). Do you think we need to get that entire SPIP approved > >> before we can start getting the API in? If so, what do you think needs > to be > >> decided to get it ready? > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> rb > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 8:24 PM Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Ryan, > >>> > >>> Great job on this! Shall we call a vote for the plan standardization > >>> SPIP? I think this is a good idea and we should do it. > >>> > >>> Notes: > >>> We definitely need new user-facing APIs to produce these new logical > >>> plans like DeleteData. But we need a design doc for these new APIs > after the > >>> SPIP passed. > >>> We definitely need the data source to provide the ability to > >>> create/drop/alter/lookup tables, but that belongs to the other SPIP and > >>> should be voted separately. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Wenchen > >>> > >>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 5:01 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi everyone, > >>>> > >>>> A few weeks ago, I wrote up a proposal to standardize SQL logical > plans > >>>> and a supporting design doc for data source catalog APIs. From the > comments > >>>> on those docs, it looks like we mostly have agreement around > standardizing > >>>> plans and around the data source catalog API. > >>>> > >>>> We still need to work out details, like the transactional API > extension, > >>>> but I'd like to get started implementing those proposals so we have > >>>> something working for the 2.4.0 release. I'm starting this thread > because I > >>>> think we're about ready to vote on the proposal and I'd like to get > any > >>>> remaining discussion going or get anyone that missed this to read > through > >>>> the docs. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks! > >>>> > >>>> rb > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Ryan Blue > >>>> Software Engineer > >>>> Netflix > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Ryan Blue > >> Software Engineer > >> Netflix > -- Ryan Blue Software Engineer Netflix
