[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2021?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15977613#comment-15977613 ]
Luke Cwik edited comment on BEAM-2021 at 4/20/17 9:49 PM: ---------------------------------------------------------- Won't core construction have proto shaded and then shaded proto versions won't align? byte[]/bytebuffer was with the goal of allowing a user to shade their version of proto in libraries as well. was (Author: lcwik): Won't core construction have proto shaded and then shaded proto versions won't align. byte[]/bytebuffer was with the goal of allowing a user to shade their version of proto in libraries as well. > Fix Java's Coder class hierarchy > -------------------------------- > > Key: BEAM-2021 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2021 > Project: Beam > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: beam-model-runner-api, sdk-java-core > Affects Versions: First stable release > Reporter: Kenneth Knowles > Assignee: Thomas Groh > > This is thoroughly out of hand. In the runner API world, there are two paths: > 1. URN plus component coders plus custom payload (in the form of component > coders alongside an SdkFunctionSpec) > 2. Custom coder (a single URN) and payload is serialized Java. I think this > never has component coders. > The other base classes have now been shown to be extraneous: they favor > saving ~3 lines of boilerplate for rarely written code at the cost of > readability. Instead they should just be dropped. > The custom payload is an Any proto in the runner API. But tying the Coder > interface to proto would be unfortunate from a design perspective and cannot > be done anyhow due to dependency hell. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)