++ On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 1:33 PM Rafael Fernandez <[email protected]> wrote:
> Very strong +1 > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 1:24 PM Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We're looking at renaming the BeamRecord class >> <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/4550>, that was used for columnar >> data. There was sufficient discussion on the naming, that I want to make >> sure the dev list is aware of naming plans here. >> >> BeamRecord is a columnar, field-based record. Currently it's used by >> BeamSQL, and the plan is to use it for schemas as well. "Record" is a >> confusing name for this class, as all elements in the Beam model are >> referred to as "records," whether or not they have schemas. "Row" is a much >> clearer name. >> >> There was a lot of discussion whether to name this BeamRow or just plain >> Row (in the org.apache.beam.values namespace). The argument in favor of >> BeamRow was so that people aren't forced to qualify their type names in the >> case of a conflict with a Row from another package. The argument in favor >> of Row was that it's a better name, it's in the Beam namespace anyway, and >> it's what the rest of the world (Cassandra, Hive, Spark, etc.) calls >> similar classes. >> >> RIght not consensus on the PR is leaning to Row. If you feel strongly, >> please speak up :) >> >> Reuven >> >
