+1 since this brings us closer to a portability story. On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 > > It makes sense. > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB > > > On 01/17/2017 10:46 AM, Thomas Groh wrote: > >> Hey everyone; >> >> I've been working on parts of the runner API recently, and part of that >> has >> included a shift of how composite inputs and outputs must be represented >> by >> the time a PipelineRunner begins to access them. I have a PR that >> completes >> this work within the Java SDK, but wanted to ensure that everyone agrees >> on >> the change and anything required on their end before I start fiddling with >> all of the runner internals. For anyone except current runner authors, >> this >> should be completely transparent; for current runner authors, I need a >> short code review but nothing else. >> >> I've written a one-pager about what's changing; the link is at >> https://s.apache.org/beam-runner-composites >> >> or directly at >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_CHLnj1RFAGKy_MfR54Xmixa >> kYNmCnhGZLWmuDSMJ10/edit#heading=h.qlkikisrzqqf >> >> Thanks, >> >> Thomas >> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > [email protected] > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
