Something strange is going on. We can see it in the dropdown list in the UI, but if you click on that tag you get a 404.
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Reuven Lax <re...@google.com> wrote: > I created a v2.2 tag. Let me look to see what happened. > > On Dec 13, 2017 2:31 PM, "Steve Niemitz" <sniem...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Sorry for resurrecting this thread, but I was trying to build 2.2.0 from >> source today and noticed there was no v2.2.0 tag (only v2.2.0-RC4). I >> assume that's not intentional? >> >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 3:35 AM, Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Eugene for opening the poll (sorry if I didn't before I was >>> quite busy in the last two days but expected to do it today). >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:27 AM, Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Eugene Kirpichov <kirpic...@google.com >>> > >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> I've sent the poll >>> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5bc2e184a24de9dbc8184ff >>> d2720d1894010497d47d956b395e037df@%3Cuser.beam.apache.org%3E >>> >> Will figure out how to tweet from @ApacheBeam, and sent the Twitter >>> poll >>> >> as well (or ask someone to). >>> > >>> > >>> > I tweeted the poll. >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:47 PM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> +1 on moving forward with the plan suggested by kirpichov@ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com >>> > >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> +1 to moving forward with this plan. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> (FWIW, this seems *less* backwards incompatible than, say, moving >>> from >>> >>>> Spark 1 to Spark 2, which was decided much quicker. I suppose the >>> >>>> Spark change has a lower bound on the number of users it could >>> impact >>> >>>> though.) >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Eugene Kirpichov < >>> kirpic...@google.com> >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> > Okay, then let's go forward. Seems that we should: >>> >>>> > - Open a new poll on user@, in light of 2.2 having been released >>> >>>> > - Open a twitter poll >>> >>>> > - Tweet that there's also a poll going on on user@ >>> >>>> > - Runner authors will reach out to respective runner user >>> communities >>> >>>> > - 2 weeks later we gather results and decide >>> >>>> > ? >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:16 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> +1 For Eugene’s arguments waiting for Beam 3.0 seems still far >>> away, >>> >>>> >> and starting to improve Beam to offer a Java 8 friendly >>> experience >>> >>>> >> seems like an excellent idea. >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> I understand the backwards compatibility argument. We should do >>> the >>> >>>> >> poll in twitter + try to reach more users for comments. If you >>> >>>> >> consider that it is worth, I can open a second poll at user@. >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> In any case we should try to move forward, even if we have more >>> than >>> >>>> >> 5% of users who want to stay on Java 7 we can consider to >>> maintain >>> >>>> >> minor releases of a backwards compatible version where we can >>> >>>> >> backport >>> >>>> >> only critical fixes e.g. security/data related errors but nothing >>> >>>> >> new, >>> >>>> >> in case some user really needs to have them. Of course this can >>> be >>> >>>> >> some extra work (to be discussed). >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> >>>> >> <j...@nanthrax.net> >>> >>>> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >> > +1, and sorry again, I thought we got an consensus. >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> >> > Regards >>> >>>> >> > JB >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> >> > On 12/05/2017 07:10 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> +1 to the poll and also to Reuven's point. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> Those without a support contract would have been using JDK 7 >>> >>>> >> >> without >>> >>>> >> >> security updates for years. IMO it seems harmful, as a >>> netizen, to >>> >>>> >> >> encourage >>> >>>> >> >> its use/existence. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> If there's no noise from the prior thread, then I would >>> assume no >>> >>>> >> >> one >>> >>>> >> >> on >>> >>>> >> >> user@ has any objection. Anyone else with customers should >>> reach >>> >>>> >> >> out to >>> >>>> >> >> them. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> Kenn >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Reuven Lax <re...@google.com >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:re...@google.com>> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> Technically it's a backwards-incompatible change, however >>> if >>> >>>> >> >> we are >>> >>>> >> >> convinced the risk is low we could do it. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> As mentioned on the original thread, it's not clear that >>> all >>> >>>> >> >> Beam >>> >>>> >> >> users read >>> >>>> >> >> user@ - e.g. most Dataflow users definitely do not. I >>> think we >>> >>>> >> >> need >>> >>>> >> >> to >>> >>>> >> >> separately reach out to users of each runner through >>> >>>> >> >> runner-specific >>> >>>> >> >> channels. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> Reuven >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 9:37 PM, Eugene Kirpichov >>> >>>> >> >> <kirpic...@google.com >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:kirpic...@google.com>> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> On the original thread >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2e1890c62d9f022f09b20e9 >>> f12f130fe9f1042e391979087f725d2e0@%3Cuser.beam.apache.org%3E >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2e1890c62d9f022f09b20e >>> 9f12f130fe9f1042e391979087f725d2e0@%3Cuser.beam.apache.org%3E> >>> >>>> >> >> , >>> >>>> >> >> Robert and Ismaël were in favor of no major version >>> change >>> >>>> >> >> [Ismaël >>> >>>> >> >> said:/Also I am afraid that if we wait/ >>> >>>> >> >> /until we have enough changes to switch Beam to a new >>> >>>> >> >> major >>> >>>> >> >> version the >>> >>>> >> >> switch to Java 8 will happen too late, probably after >>> Java >>> >>>> >> >> 8's >>> >>>> >> >> end >>> >>>> >> >> of >>> >>>> >> >> life. And I am not exaggerating, Java 8 is planned to >>> EOL >>> >>>> >> >> next >>> >>>> >> >> march >>> >>>> >> >> 2018!/]; JB and now Reuven are in favor of a major >>> version >>> >>>> >> >> change; >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> nobody so far argued against switching to Java8 in >>> >>>> >> >> general. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> I'm personally in favor of no major version change >>> (i.e. >>> >>>> >> >> not >>> >>>> >> >> waiting >>> >>>> >> >> until all other large changes for Beam 3.0 converge, >>> which >>> >>>> >> >> will >>> >>>> >> >> likely >>> >>>> >> >> be many months), because: >>> >>>> >> >> - Reasons Ismaël cited; plus the reason that most >>> people >>> >>>> >> >> are >>> >>>> >> >> likely >>> >>>> >> >> already using Java 8. >>> >>>> >> >> - Going Java8-only earlier will make other Beam 3.0 >>> APIs >>> >>>> >> >> better >>> >>>> >> >> for >>> >>>> >> >> Java8 users, because we (Beam contributors) will have >>> >>>> >> >> experience >>> >>>> >> >> working >>> >>>> >> >> with them within the SDK in Java8 (e.g. writing tests >>> with >>> >>>> >> >> use >>> >>>> >> >> of >>> >>>> >> >> lambdas and noticing whether it's clunky, or whether >>> some >>> >>>> >> >> other >>> >>>> >> >> Beam >>> >>>> >> >> APIs need better Java8 support). >>> >>>> >> >> - Going Java8 will make it more reasonable to include >>> >>>> >> >> (mostly >>> >>>> >> >> or >>> >>>> >> >> only) >>> >>>> >> >> Java8 snippets in Beam documentation, which will >>> obviously >>> >>>> >> >> look >>> >>>> >> >> more >>> >>>> >> >> concise and attractive, addressing one of the common >>> >>>> >> >> concerns >>> >>>> >> >> of >>> >>>> >> >> Beam >>> >>>> >> >> users that it has a heavyweight API compared to >>> >>>> >> >> functional-style >>> >>>> >> >> APIs of >>> >>>> >> >> Spark etc. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> I think resolving this via a poll of users would be >>> >>>> >> >> reasonable. >>> >>>> >> >> I'd >>> >>>> >> >> suggest e.g. the following phrasing: >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> Apache Beam is considering dropping support for Java >>> 7, >>> >>>> >> >> and >>> >>>> >> >> supporting >>> >>>> >> >> only Java 8 and above in a subsequent release. How >>> would >>> >>>> >> >> it >>> >>>> >> >> impact >>> >>>> >> >> your >>> >>>> >> >> usage of Beam? >>> >>>> >> >> - I am already using only Java 8+ for building my Beam >>> >>>> >> >> code >>> >>>> >> >> - I am using Java 7 for building my Beam code, but I >>> would >>> >>>> >> >> have >>> >>>> >> >> no >>> >>>> >> >> trouble switching to Java 8 >>> >>>> >> >> - I am using Java 7 for building my Beam code, and >>> >>>> >> >> dropping >>> >>>> >> >> Java 7 >>> >>>> >> >> would >>> >>>> >> >> be a blocker or hindrance to adopting the new release >>> for >>> >>>> >> >> me >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> We could tweet this poll on Apache Beam twitter and >>> >>>> >> >> publish on >>> >>>> >> >> user@, >>> >>>> >> >> and, say, if we receive 5% or fewer votes for option 3 >>> >>>> >> >> after >>> >>>> >> >> keeping it >>> >>>> >> >> open for 2 weeks, then adopt Java 8 without a major >>> >>>> >> >> version >>> >>>> >> >> change. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> WDYT? >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:34 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> >>>> >> >> <j...@nanthrax.net >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> Good idea ! Definitely +1 >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> Regards >>> >>>> >> >> JB >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> On 12/05/2017 05:25 AM, Reuven Lax wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> > We should bring this up on the Beam 3.0 thread. >>> >>>> >> >> Since >>> >>>> >> >> it's >>> >>>> >> >> technically a >>> >>>> >> >> > backwards-incompatible change, it might make a >>> good >>> >>>> >> >> item >>> >>>> >> >> for Beam >>> >>>> >> >> 3.0. >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Reuven >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Jean-Baptiste >>> >>>> >> >> Onofré >>> >>>> >> >> <j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net> >>> >>>> >> >> > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net <mailto: >>> j...@nanthrax.net>>> >>> >>>> >> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > My apologizes, I thought we had a consensus >>> >>>> >> >> already. >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Regards >>> >>>> >> >> > JB >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > On 12/04/2017 11:22 PM, Eugene Kirpichov >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Thanks JB for sending the detailed >>> notes >>> >>>> >> >> about >>> >>>> >> >> new >>> >>>> >> >> stuff >>> >>>> >> >> in 2.2.0! A lot >>> >>>> >> >> > of exciting things indeed. >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Regarding Java 8: I thought our >>> consensus >>> >>>> >> >> was to >>> >>>> >> >> have the >>> >>>> >> >> release notes >>> >>>> >> >> > say that we're *considering* going >>> >>>> >> >> Java8-only, >>> >>>> >> >> and >>> >>>> >> >> use >>> >>>> >> >> that to get more >>> >>>> >> >> > opinions from the user community - but >>> I >>> >>>> >> >> can't >>> >>>> >> >> find >>> >>>> >> >> the >>> >>>> >> >> emails that made >>> >>>> >> >> > me think so. >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > +Ismaël Mejía <mailto: >>> ieme...@gmail.com >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com> <mailto: >>> ieme...@gmail.com >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com>>> - do >>> >>>> >> >> > you think we should formally conclude >>> the >>> >>>> >> >> vote >>> >>>> >> >> on >>> >>>> >> >> the >>> >>>> >> >> thread [VOTE] >>> >>>> >> >> > [DISCUSSION] Remove support for Java 7? >>> >>>> >> >> > Or should we take more steps - e.g. >>> perhaps >>> >>>> >> >> tweet a >>> >>>> >> >> link >>> >>>> >> >> to that thread >>> >>>> >> >> > from the Beam twitter account, ask >>> people >>> >>>> >> >> to >>> >>>> >> >> chime >>> >>>> >> >> in, >>> >>>> >> >> and wait for say >>> >>>> >> >> > 2 weeks before declaring a conclusion? >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Let's also have a process JIRA for >>> going >>> >>>> >> >> Java8. >>> >>>> >> >> I've >>> >>>> >> >> filed one: >>> >>>> >> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira >>> /browse/BEAM-3285 >>> >>>> >> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3285> >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3285 >>> >>>> >> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3285 >>> >> >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 1:58 AM >>> >>>> >> >> Jean-Baptiste >>> >>>> >> >> Onofré >>> >>>> >> >> <j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net> >>> >>>> >> >> > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net> >>> >>>> >> >> > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>>>> >>> >>>> >> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Just an important note that we >>> forgot >>> >>>> >> >> to >>> >>>> >> >> mention. >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > !! The 2.2.0 release will be the >>> last >>> >>>> >> >> one >>> >>>> >> >> supporting >>> >>>> >> >> Spark 1.x and >>> >>>> >> >> > Java 7 !! >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Starting from Beam 2.3.0, the >>> Spark >>> >>>> >> >> runner >>> >>>> >> >> will work >>> >>>> >> >> only with >>> >>>> >> >> > Spark 2.x and we >>> >>>> >> >> > will focus only Java 8. >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > Regards >>> >>>> >> >> > JB >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > On 12/04/2017 10:15 AM, >>> Jean-Baptiste >>> >>>> >> >> Onofré >>> >>>> >> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> > > Thanks Reuven ! >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > I would like to emphasize on >>> some >>> >>>> >> >> highlights in >>> >>>> >> >> 2.2.0 release: >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > - New IOs have been introduced: >>> >>>> >> >> > > * TikaIO leveraging Apache >>> Tika, >>> >>>> >> >> allowing >>> >>>> >> >> the >>> >>>> >> >> deal with a lot >>> >>>> >> >> > of different >>> >>>> >> >> > > data formats >>> >>>> >> >> > > * RedisIO to read and write >>> >>>> >> >> key/value >>> >>>> >> >> pairs >>> >>>> >> >> from a Redis >>> >>>> >> >> > server. This >>> >>>> >> >> > IO will >>> >>>> >> >> > > be soon extended to Redis >>> PubSub. >>> >>>> >> >> > > * FileIO provides transforms >>> for >>> >>>> >> >> working >>> >>>> >> >> with >>> >>>> >> >> files (raw). >>> >>>> >> >> > Especially, it >>> >>>> >> >> > > provides matching file >>> patterns and >>> >>>> >> >> read >>> >>>> >> >> on >>> >>>> >> >> patterns. It can be >>> >>>> >> >> > easily >>> >>>> >> >> > extended >>> >>>> >> >> > > for a specific format (like we >>> do >>> >>>> >> >> in >>> >>>> >> >> AvroIO >>> >>>> >> >> or >>> >>>> >> >> TextIO now). >>> >>>> >> >> > > * SolrIO to interact with >>> Apache >>> >>>> >> >> Solr >>> >>>> >> >> (Lucene) >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > - On the other hand, >>> improvements >>> >>>> >> >> have >>> >>>> >> >> been >>> >>>> >> >> performed on >>> >>>> >> >> > existing IOs: >>> >>>> >> >> > > * We started to introduce >>> readAll >>> >>>> >> >> pattern >>> >>>> >> >> in >>> >>>> >> >> IOs (AvroIO, >>> >>>> >> >> > TextIO, JdbcIO, >>> >>>> >> >> > > ...), allowing to pass >>> "request" >>> >>>> >> >> arguments >>> >>>> >> >> via an >>> >>>> >> >> input PCollection. >>> >>>> >> >> > > * ElasticsearchIO has an >>> improved >>> >>>> >> >> support >>> >>>> >> >> of >>> >>>> >> >> different >>> >>>> >> >> > Elasticsearch >>> >>>> >> >> > version >>> >>>> >> >> > > (including Elasticsearch 5.x). >>> It >>> >>>> >> >> also >>> >>>> >> >> now >>> >>>> >> >> supports SSL/TLS. >>> >>>> >> >> > > * HBaseIO is now able to do >>> >>>> >> >> dynamic >>> >>>> >> >> work >>> >>>> >> >> rebalancing >>> >>>> >> >> > > * KinesisIO uses a more >>> accurate >>> >>>> >> >> watermark >>> >>>> >> >> (based on >>> >>>> >> >> > approximateArrivalTimestamp) >>> >>>> >> >> > > * TextIO now supports custom >>> >>>> >> >> delimiter >>> >>>> >> >> and like >>> >>>> >> >> AvroIO, >>> >>>> >> >> > supports the >>> >>>> >> >> > readAll >>> >>>> >> >> > > pattern, >>> >>>> >> >> > > * Performance improvements on >>> >>>> >> >> JdbcIO >>> >>>> >> >> when >>> >>>> >> >> it >>> >>>> >> >> has to read lot >>> >>>> >> >> > of rows >>> >>>> >> >> > > * Kafka write supports >>> >>>> >> >> Exactly-Once >>> >>>> >> >> pattern >>> >>>> >> >> (introduce in >>> >>>> >> >> > Kafka 0.11.x) >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > - A new DSL has been >>> introduced: >>> >>>> >> >> the SQL >>> >>>> >> >> DSL ! >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > We are now focus on 2.3.0 >>> release >>> >>>> >> >> with >>> >>>> >> >> new >>> >>>> >> >> improvements and >>> >>>> >> >> > features ! >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > Stay tuned ! >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > JB on behalf of the Apache Beam >>> >>>> >> >> community. >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > > On 12/02/2017 11:40 PM, Reuven >>> Lax >>> >>>> >> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> > >> The Apache Beam community is >>> >>>> >> >> pleased to >>> >>>> >> >> announce the >>> >>>> >> >> > availability of the >>> >>>> >> >> > >> 2.2.0 release. >>> >>>> >> >> > >> >>> >>>> >> >> > >> This release adds support for >>> >>>> >> >> generic >>> >>>> >> >> file >>> >>>> >> >> sources and sinks >>> >>>> >> >> > (beyond TextIO >>> >>>> >> >> > >> and AvroIO) using FileIO, >>> >>>> >> >> including >>> >>>> >> >> support for >>> >>>> >> >> dynamic >>> >>>> >> >> > filenames using >>> >>>> >> >> > >> readAll; this allows streaming >>> >>>> >> >> pipelines >>> >>>> >> >> to now >>> >>>> >> >> read from files by >>> >>>> >> >> > >> continuously monitoring a >>> >>>> >> >> directory for >>> >>>> >> >> new >>> >>>> >> >> filw. Many other >>> >>>> >> >> > IOs are >>> >>>> >> >> > improved, >>> >>>> >> >> > >> notably including exactly-once >>> >>>> >> >> support >>> >>>> >> >> for >>> >>>> >> >> the >>> >>>> >> >> Kafka sink. Initial >>> >>>> >> >> > support for >>> >>>> >> >> > >> BEAM-SQL is also included in >>> this >>> >>>> >> >> release. >>> >>>> >> >> For a >>> >>>> >> >> more-complete >>> >>>> >> >> > list of major >>> >>>> >> >> > >> changes in the release, please >>> >>>> >> >> refer to >>> >>>> >> >> the >>> >>>> >> >> release notes [2]. >>> >>>> >> >> > >> >>> >>>> >> >> > >> The 2.2.0 release is now the >>> >>>> >> >> recommended >>> >>>> >> >> version; we encourage >>> >>>> >> >> > everyone to >>> >>>> >> >> > >> upgrade from any earlier >>> releases. >>> >>>> >> >> > >> >>> >>>> >> >> > >> We’d like to invite everyone >>> to >>> >>>> >> >> try out >>> >>>> >> >> Apache >>> >>>> >> >> Beam today and >>> >>>> >> >> > consider >>> >>>> >> >> > >> joining our vibrant >>> community. We >>> >>>> >> >> welcome >>> >>>> >> >> feedback, >>> >>>> >> >> > contribution and >>> >>>> >> >> > >> participation through our >>> mailing >>> >>>> >> >> lists, >>> >>>> >> >> issue >>> >>>> >> >> tracker, pull >>> >>>> >> >> > requests, and >>> >>>> >> >> > >> events. >>> >>>> >> >> > >> >>> >>>> >> >> > >> - Reuven Lax, on behalf of the >>> >>>> >> >> Apache >>> >>>> >> >> Beam >>> >>>> >> >> community. >>> >>>> >> >> > >> >>> >>>> >> >> > >> [1] >>> >>>> >> >> https://beam.apache.org/get-started/downloads/ >>> >>>> >> >> <https://beam.apache.org/get-started/downloads/> >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> <https://beam.apache.org/get-started/downloads/ >>> >>>> >> >> <https://beam.apache.org/get-started/downloads/>> >>> >>>> >> >> > >> [2] >>> >>>> >> >> > >> >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje >>> ctId=12319527&version=12341044 >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proj >>> ectId=12319527&version=12341044> >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proj >>> ectId=12319527&version=12341044 >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proj >>> ectId=12319527&version=12341044>> >>> >>>> >> >> > >> >>> >>>> >> >> > > >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > -- >>> >>>> >> >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> >>>> >> >> > jbono...@apache.org <mailto: >>> jbono...@apache.org> >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org>> >>> >>>> >> >> > <mailto:jbono...@apache.org >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org> >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org>>> >>> >>>> >> >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> >>>> >> >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > -- >>> >>>> >> >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> >>>> >> >> > jbono...@apache.org <mailto: >>> jbono...@apache.org> >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org >>> >>>> >> >> <mailto:jbono...@apache.org>> >>> >>>> >> >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> >>>> >> >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> > >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> -- >>> >>>> >> >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> >>>> >> >> jbono...@apache.org <mailto: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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> >> >>
