+1 it sounds good to me. I have some more long term ideas as well.
Regards JB On 20/10/2018 03:09, Ahmet Altay wrote: > I looked at #6718, I think this is great as a starting point and not > just a mock. I particularly like that: > - It divides the roadmap along major component areas (SDKs, runners, > portability). This is good because (a) it provides a complete top down > picture and (b) allows groups of people working in these areas to build > their own roadmaps. This division would empower people working in those > components to build mini-roadmaps. This make sense to me because people > with most context in those components would likely to already have some > vision somewhere about the future of those components and they are > already working towards realizing those. Now, they can share it with > rest of the community and users in a structured way. > - The other good bit is that, there is a index page that pulls major > bits from each individual roadmap and provides a coherent list of where > the project is going. It would be very easy for users to just look at > this page and get a sense of the where the project is going. > > I believe this break down makes it easier for the most folks in the > community to participate in the process of building and roadmap. In my > opinion, we can merge Kenn's _mock_ and ask people to start filling in > the areas they care about. > > Ahmet > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org > <mailto:k...@apache.org>> wrote: > > I mocked up a little something > on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718 > <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718>. > > Kenn > > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org > <mailto:t...@apache.org>> wrote: > > Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough. > It is also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a > list of current and proposed initiatives? > > I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer > individual, per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way > they are easy to maintain by respective contributors. > > Thanks > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org > <mailto:k...@apache.org>> wrote: > > I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It > should not look like a company's roadmap. This is just a > term that users search for and ask for. It might be an > incremental improvement > on https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress> to > present it more for users, to just give them a picture of > the trajectory. For example, Beam Python on Flink would > probably be of considerable interest but it is buried at > https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status>. > > Kenn > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org > <mailto:t...@apache.org>> wrote: > > As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It > may convey the impression of an outside entity that > controls what is being worked on and when. At least in > theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals > decide what they take up. There are projects that have a > "list of initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that > are either in idea phase or ongoing. Those provide an > idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a > sufficient for those looking for the overall direction? > > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles > <k...@apache.org <mailto:k...@apache.org>> wrote: > > Did some searching about to see what other projects > have done. Most OSS projects with open governance > don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here are > some from various [types of] projects. Please > contribute links for any project you can think of > that might be interesting examples. > > My personal favorite for readability and content is > Bazel. It does not do timelines, but says what they > are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, items > than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some > breakouts into roadmaps for sub-bits. > > Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and > readable though) > - > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan> > - > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals> > > Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not > in real readable format): > - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html > <https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html> > > Apache Apex > - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html > <http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html> > > Apache Calcite Avatica > - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html > <https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html> > > Apache Kafka > - > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan> > > Tensorflow > - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap > <https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap> > > Kubernetes > - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones > <https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones> > > Firefox > - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap > <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap> > > Servo > - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap > <https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap> > > Bazel > - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html > <https://bazel.build/roadmap.html> > > Kenn > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson > <timrobertson...@gmail.com > <mailto:timrobertson...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Thanks Kenn, > > I think this is a very good idea. > > My preference would be part of the website and > not on a wiki. Those who need to contribute can > do so easily and I find wikis often get > messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also > mean that we can use dev@ and Jira to track, > discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content > in a more controlled manner than a wiki which > can change without notification. > > I find it difficult to provide input on style / > format without mentioning what might be on it > I'm afraid. > > - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with > links out to Jiras for more detail and to help > show transparent progress > > - Potential users currently observing the > project is a very important audience IMO > (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users > seeking Kerberos support, AWS cloud users etc). > Might it help for us to identify the audiences > the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style? > > Tim > > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles > <k...@apache.org <mailto:k...@apache.org>> wrote: > > Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev > community, while important stuff for users > should go on the web site. But experimenting > with the content on cwiki seems like a quick > and easy thing to try out. > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian > Michels <m...@apache.org > <mailto:m...@apache.org>> wrote: > > Great idea, Kenn! > > How about putting the roadmap in the > Confluent wiki? We can link the > page from the web site. > > The timeline should not be too specific > but should give users an idea of > what to expect. > > On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > What about a link in the menu. It > should contain a list of features and > > estimate date with probable error > (like "in 5 months +- 1 months) > > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO. > > > > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth > Knowles <k...@apache.org > <mailto:k...@apache.org> > > <mailto:k...@apache.org > <mailto:k...@apache.org>>> a écrit : > > > > Hi all, > > > > We made an attempt at putting > together a sort of roadmap [1] in the > > past and also some wide-ranging > threads about what could be on it > > [2]. and I think we should pick it > up again. The description I > > really liked was "strategic and > user impacting initiatives (ongoing > > and future) in an easy to consume > format" [3]. It seems that we had > > feedback asking for a Roadmap at > the London summit [4]. > > > > I would like to first focus on > meta-questions rather than what would > > be on it: > > > > - What style / format should it > have to be most useful for users? > > - Where should it be presented? > > > > I asked a couple people to try to > find the roadmap on the web site, > > as a test, and they didn't really > know which tab to click on first, > > so that's a starting problem. They > didn't even find Works In > > Progress [5] after clicking > Contribute. The level of detail of that > > list varies widely. > > > > I'd also love to see hypothetical > formats for it, to see how to > > balance pithiness with crucial > details. > > > > Kenn > > > > [1] > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E > > <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E> > > [2] > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E > > <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E> > > [3] > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E > > <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E> > > [4] > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E > > <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E> > > > > [5] > > https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress > > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress> > > > > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
