gt;>> >
>>> > -Matt Cheah?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > From: Ryan Blue
>>> > Reply-To: "rb...@netflix.com"
>>> > Date: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 4:53 PM
>>> > To: Matt Cheah
>&
>> >
>> > From: Ryan Blue
>> > Reply-To: "rb...@netflix.com"
>> > Date: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 4:53 PM
>> > To: Matt Cheah
>> > Cc: Sean Owen , Wenchen Fan ,
>> Xiao Li , Matei Zaharia ,
>> Spark Dev List
>&
gt; >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Matt Cheah?
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Ryan Blue
> > Reply-To: "rb...@netflix.com"
> > Date: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 4:53 PM
> > To: Matt Cheah
> > Cc: Sean Owen , Wenchen Fan ,
> Xiao
e that for Spark
> 4?
>
>
>
>
> -Matt Cheah?
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Blue
> Reply-To: "rb...@netflix.com"
> Date: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 4:53 PM
> To: Matt Cheah
> Cc: Sean Owen , Wenchen Fan , Xiao Li
> , Matei Zaha
t;
>
> -Matt Cheah?
>
>
>
> *From: *Ryan Blue
> *Reply-To: *"rb...@netflix.com"
> *Date: *Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 4:53 PM
> *To: *Matt Cheah
> *Cc: *Sean Owen , Wenchen Fan ,
> Xiao Li , Matei Zaharia ,
> Spark Dev List
> *Subject: *Re: [DISCU
ubject: Re: [DISCUSS] Spark 3.0 and DataSourceV2
That's a good question.
While I'd love to have a solution for that, I don't think it is a good idea to
delay DSv2 until we have one. That is going to require a lot of internal
changes and I don't see how we could make the release date if we are
ebruary 26, 2019 at 4:40 PM
> *To: *Matt Cheah
> *Cc: *Sean Owen , Wenchen Fan ,
> Xiao Li , Matei Zaharia ,
> Spark Dev List
> *Subject: *Re: [DISCUSS] Spark 3.0 and DataSourceV2
>
>
>
> Thanks for bumping this, Matt. I think we can have the discussion here to
> clari
Thanks for bumping this, Matt. I think we can have the discussion here to
clarify exactly what we’re committing to and then have a vote thread once
we’re agreed.
Getting back to the DSv2 discussion, I think we have a good handle on what
would be added:
- Plugin system for catalogs
-
ia , Spark Dev
List
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Spark 3.0 and DataSourceV2
Thanks for bumping this, Matt. I think we can have the discussion here to
clarify exactly what we’re committing to and then have a vote thread once we’re
agreed.
Getting back to the DSv2 discussion, I think we have a g
What would then be the next steps we'd take to collectively decide on plans and
timelines moving forward? Might I suggest scheduling a conference call with
appropriate PMCs to put our ideas together? Maybe such a discussion can take
place at next week's meeting? Or do we need to have a separate
Sure, I don't read anyone making these statements though? Let's assume
good intent, that "foo should happen" as "my opinion as a member of
the community, which is not solely up to me, is that foo should
happen". I understand it's possible for a person to make their opinion
over-weighted; this
>
> I’m not quite sure what you mean here.
>
I'll try to explain once more, then I'll drop it since continuing the rest
of the discussion in this thread is more important than getting
side-tracked.
There is nothing wrong with individuals advocating for what they think
should or should not be in
Thanks to Matt for his philosophical take. I agree.
The intent is to set a common goal, so that we work toward getting v2 in a
usable state as a community. Part of that is making choices to get it done
on time, which we have already seen on this thread: setting out more
clearly what we mean by
>
> To your other message: I already see a number of PMC members here. Who's
> the other entity?
>
I'll answer indirectly since pointing fingers isn't really my intent. In
the absence of a PMC vote, I react negatively to individuals making new
declarative policy statements or statements to the
To your other message: I already see a number of PMC members here. Who's
the other entity? The PMC is the thing that says a thing is a release,
sure, but this discussion is properly a community one. And here we are,
this is lovely to see.
(May I remind everyone to casually, sometime, browse the
also the features that have remained open for the longest time
> and we really need to move forward on these. Putting a target release for
> 3.0 will help in that regard.
>
>
>
> -Matt Cheah
>
>
>
> *From: *Ryan Blue
> *Reply-To: *"rb...@netflix.com"
> *D
ebruary 21, 2019 at 2:22 PM
To: Matei Zaharia
Cc: Spark Dev List
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Spark 3.0 and DataSourceV2
I'm all for making releases more often if we want. But this work could really
use a target release to motivate getting it done. If we agree that it will
block a release, the
I'm all for making releases more often if we want. But this work could
really use a target release to motivate getting it done. If we agree that
it will block a release, then everyone is motivated to review and get the
PRs in.
If this work doesn't make it in the 3.0 release, I'm not confident
How large would the delay be? My 2 cents are that there’s nothing stopping us
from making feature releases more often if we want to, so we shouldn’t see this
as an “either delay 3.0 or release in >6 months” decision. If the work is
likely to get in with a small delay and simplifies our work
Hi everyone,
In the DSv2 sync last night, we had a discussion about roadmap and what the
goal should be for getting the main features into Spark. We all agreed that
3.0 should be that goal, even if it means delaying the 3.0 release.
The possibility of delaying the 3.0 release may be
20 matches
Mail list logo
