A large set of Beam users will be coming from the pre-Apache technologies (aka Google Cloud Dataflow, Scio). Because Dataflow was 1.0 before Beam started, there is a lot of pre-existing documentation, Stack Overflow, etc. that refers to version 1.0 to mean what is now a year-and-a-half old release.
I think starting Beam from "2.0.0" will be best for that set of users and frankly also new ones -- this will make it unambiguous whether referring to pre-Beam or Beam releases. I understand the 1.0 motivation -- it's cleaner in isolation -- but I think it would lead to long-term confusion in the user community. On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 to what Jesse and Amit said. > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Amit Sela <amitsel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think 1.0.0 for a couple of reasons: > > > > * It makes sense coming after 0.X (+1 Jesse). > > * It is the FIRST stable release as a project, regardless of its roots. > > * while the SDK is definitely a 2.0.0, Beam is not made only of the SDK, > > and I hope we'll have more milage with users running all sorts of runners > > in production before our 2.0.0 release. > > > > Amit. > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:25 PM Jesse Anderson <je...@smokinghand.com> > > wrote: > > > > I think 1.0 makes the most sense. > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, 10:57 AM Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > The first stable release is our next major project-wide goal; see > > > discussion in [1]. I've been referring to it as "the first stable > > release" > > > for a long time, not "1.0.0" or "2.0.0" or "2017" or something else, to > > > make sure we have an unbiased discussion and a consensus-based decision > > on > > > this matter. > > > > > > I think that now is the time to consider the appropriate designation > for > > > our first stable release, and formally make a decision on it. A > > reasonable > > > choices could be "1.0.0" or "2.0.0", perhaps there are others. > > > > > > 1.0.0: > > > * It logically comes after the current series, 0.x.y. > > > * Most people would expect it, I suppose. > > > * A possible confusion between Dataflow SDKs and Beam SDKs carrying the > > > same number. > > > > > > 2.0.0: > > > * Follows the pattern some other projects have taken -- continuing > their > > > version numbering scheme from their previous origin. > > > * Better communicates project's roots, and degree of maturity. > > > * May be unexpected to some users. > > > > > > I'd invite everyone to share their thoughts and preferences -- names > are > > > important and well correlated with success. Thanks! > > > > > > Davor > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c35067071aec9029d9100ae > 973c629 > > > 9aa919c31d0de623ac367128e2@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E > > > > > >
