Fair enough. That's fine for me.
Regards JB On Aug 31, 2017, 19:03, at 19:03, Steve Niemitz <sniem...@apache.org> wrote: >I'll chime in as a user who would love to see 2.2.0 sooner than later, >specifically for the file IO Eugene mentioned. We're using the AvroIO >enhancements extensively, but I am hesitant to run from HEAD in master >in >production. > >On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Eugene Kirpichov < >kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > >> There are a lot of users including very large production customers >who have >> been asking specifically for the features that are in 2.2.0 (most of >them >> accumulated while 2.1.0 was being iterated on) - mostly I'm referring >to >> the vastly improved file IO - and they have been hesitant to use Beam >at >> HEAD in production. I think the slight unusualness of having a >release >> published soon after the previous release is a small price to pay for >> helping those users :) >> >> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017, 11:30 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >> >> > As we released 2.1.0 couple of weeks ago, it could sound weird to >the >> > users to >> > do a 2.2.0 so fast. If we have a blocking issue, we can do a 2.1.1 >If >> it's >> > new >> > features, why not having a release pace in October (2.2.0) ? >> > >> > Thoughts ? >> > >> > Regards >> > JB >> > >> > On 08/31/2017 08:27 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: >> > > I'd suggest to do 2.2.0 as quickly as possible, and target 2.3.0 >for >> > > October. I don't see a reason to delay 2.2.0 until October: >there's a >> > huge >> > > amount of features worth releasing between when 2.1.0 was cut and >the >> > > current HEAD. >> > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:18 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré ><j...@nanthrax.net >> > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> With a 2.2.0 in October, I think we can try to move forward on >> RedisIO. >> > >> >> > >> I'm now back from vacation and I will resume the work on this >IO. >> > >> >> > >> Regards >> > >> JB >> > >> >> > >> On 08/30/2017 11:27 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: >> > >>> RedisIO in 2.2.0 is very unlikely. There's still a lot of >review >> > >> remaining >> > >>> last time I checked on the PR. >> > >>> >> > >>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:24 PM Vilhelm von Ehrenheim < >> > >>> vonehrenh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>>> Any chance to get the RedisIO in this release? >> > >>>> [BEAM-1017] Add RedisIO #1687 >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Its not my PR but ll be happy to assist if there is anything I >can >> do >> > to >> > >>>> help. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On 30 Aug 2017 22:46, "Daniel Ribeiro" >> <danie...@squareup.com.invalid >> > > >> > >>>> wrote: >> > >>>> >> > >>>>> It would be great to get a bump on pubsub >> > >>>>> <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/pom.xml#L145> >> > dependency. >> > >> It >> > >>>>> is >> > >>>>> currently very outdated (v1-rev10-1.22.0, which was released >over a >> > >> year >> > >>>>> ago >> > >>>>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/google/apis/google- >> > >>>>> api-services-pubsub/v1-rev10-1.22.0/> >> > >>>>> ). >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Eugene Kirpichov < >> > >>>>> kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>>> Thanks Ismael. I've marked these two issues for fix in >2.2.0. >> > >>>> Definitely >> > >>>>>> agree that at least the first one must be fixed. >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> Here's the current burndown list >> > >>>>>> >https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12341044 - >> we >> > >>>>> should >> > >>>>>> clean it up. >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM Ismaël Mejía ><ieme...@gmail.com> >> > >>>> wrote: >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> The current master has accumulated a good amount of nice >features >> > >>>>>>> since 2.1.0 so a new release is welcomed. I have two >JIRAs/PR >> that >> > I >> > >>>>>>> think are important to check/solve before the cut: >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> BEAM-2516 (this is a regression on the performance of >Direct >> runner >> > >>>> on >> > >>>>>>> Java). We had never really defined if a performance >regression is >> > >>>>>>> critical to be a blocker. I executed WordCount with the >> > kinglear.txt >> > >>>>>>> (170KB) file in version 2.1.0 vs the current 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT >and I >> > >>>>>>> found that the execution time passed from 5s to 126s. So >maybe we >> > >>>> need >> > >>>>>>> to review this one before the release. I can understand if >others >> > >>>>>>> consider this a minor issue because the Direct runner is >not >> > supposed >> > >>>>>>> to be used for production, but this performance regression >can >> > cause >> > >>>> a >> > >>>>>>> bad impression for a casual user starting with Beam. >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> BEAM-2790 (fix reading from Amazon S3 via >HadoopFileSystem). I >> > think >> > >>>>>>> this one is a nice to have. I am not sure that I can tackle >it >> for >> > >>>> the >> > >>>>>>> wednesday cut. I’m OOO until the beginning of next week, >but >> maybe >> > >>>>>>> someone else can take a look. In the worst case this is not >a >> > release >> > >>>>>>> blocker but definitely a really nice fix to include. >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Eugene Kirpichov >> > >>>>>>> <kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>> I'd like to get the following PRs into 2.2.0: >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> #3765 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3765> >[BEAM-2753 >> > >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2753>] Fixes >> > >>>> translation >> > >>>>>> of >> > >>>>>>>> WriteFiles side inputs (important bugfix for >DynamicDestinations >> > in >> > >>>>>>> files) >> > >>>>>>>> #3725 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3725> >[BEAM-2827 >> > >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2827>] >Introduces >> > >>>>>>>> AvroIO.watchForNewFiles (parity for AvroIO with TextIO in >a few >> > >>>>>> important >> > >>>>>>>> features) >> > >>>>>>>> #3759 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3759> >[BEAM-2828 >> > >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2828>] Moves >Match >> > >>>> into >> > >>>>>>>> FileIO.match()/matchAll() (to prevent releasing current >> > >>>>>>>> Match.filepatterns() into 2.2.0 and then having to keep it >under >> > >>>> that >> > >>>>>>> name) >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:31 AM Mingmin Xu ><mingm...@gmail.com >> > >> > >>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> Glad to see that 2.2.0 is coming. Can we include SQL >feature in >> > >>>> next >> > >>>>>>>>> release? We're in the final stage and expect to merge >back to >> > >>>> master >> > >>>>>>> this >> > >>>>>>>>> week. >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Reuven Lax >> > >>>>> <re...@google.com.invalid >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Now that Beam 2.1.0 has finally completed, I think we >should >> cut >> > >>>>>> Beam >> > >>>>>>>>> 2.2.0 >> > >>>>>>>>>> soon. I volunteer to coordinate this release. >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Are there any pending pull requests that people think >should >> be >> > >>>>>> merged >> > >>>>>>>>>> before we cut 2.2.0? If so, please let me know soon, as >I >> would >> > >>>>> like >> > >>>>>>> to >> > >>>>>>>>> cut >> > >>>>>>>>>> by Wednesday of next week. >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Reuven >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> -- >> > >>>>>>>>> ---- >> > >>>>>>>>> Mingmin >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > >> jbono...@apache.org >> > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > jbono...@apache.org >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > >>
