+1 On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 2:41 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well why we just don't merge it? I am unfamiliar with GCP deps to be > confident to LGTM it. but given that 22 checks pass and given that > Tomo addressed most comments and he has already a consistent track of > good work on dependency improvements I think it is worth to merge it > as it is. We still have some time to fix stuff if we find any > regression. WDYT? > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:36 PM Luke Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: > > > > As much as I would like to spend time on these reviews, I believe I'll > be delayed from reviewing them thoroughly till I finish other work that I'm > targeting for the 2.21 release related to portability. It would be greatly > appreciated if there are others that could review this in the meantime. > > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 7:09 AM Tomo Suzuki <suzt...@google.com> wrote: > >> > >> PR is ready (22 successful check) > >> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11156 > >> (Luke assigned himself as a reviewer) > >> > >> Regards, > >> Tomo > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:50 PM Tomo Suzuki <suzt...@google.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thank you for favorable responses. I'll start implementation. > >>> > >>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 2:22 PM Tomo Suzuki <suzt...@google.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > Do Spark or Flink have BOMs? > >>>> > >>>> Not that I know of. I couldn't find "bom" in their artifacts [1, 2]. > >>>> > >>>> [1]: https://search.maven.org/search?q=g:org.apache.flink > >>>> [2]: https://search.maven.org/search?q=g:org.apache.spark > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 1:46 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 and you have phrased the benefits and limitations well. We have > plenty of not-Google-related dependencies that use Guava and protobuf (I > know of Calcite, Cassandra, Kinesis, and Spark) so there's still work in > managing deps, but the BOM should make it a lot easier to upgrade all these > tightly coupled libraries that Google ships from their head. > >>>>> > >>>>> Do Spark or Flink have BOMs? I wonder if there's an opportunity to > catch incompatible deps at a larger scale by comparing and merging a half > dozen BOMs (although in the limit it approximately expands to one per > runner and one per IO and projects mature and become independent) > >>>>> > >>>>> Kenn > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:05 AM Luke Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> How would the Apache Beam BOM and GCP BOM work together? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 7:25 AM Filipe Regadas < > filiperega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Big +1, this is a step in the right direction and checking with > other Beam's direct and transitive deps is crucial since the referred bom > only convers a small part of it. Apache Commons, Jackson, `com.google.{api, > apis, cloud}`, slf4j comes to mind. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Filipe Regadas > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:33 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> +1 Sounds like a good improvement for users and maintainers ! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 6:59 AM Alex Van Boxel <a...@vanboxel.be> > wrote: > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > +1, I can remember the countless hours that we fought with > Google dependencies. > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2020, 04:07 Chamikara Jayalath < > chamik...@google.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> +1 for this. > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> This will make life easy for many of our users and will help > us keep GCP related dependencies compatible (which has not been easy in the > past). > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:16 PM Tomo Suzuki <suzt...@google.com> > wrote: > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> Hi Beam developers, > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> Shall we use GCP Libraries BOM [1] to specify the > Google-related library versions in Beam? > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> I've been working on Beam's dependency upgrades in the past > few months. It's time to consider a long-term solution to keep the > libraries up-to-date with small maintenance effort. To achieve that, I > propose Beam to use GCP Libraries BOM to set the Google-related library > versions, rather than the current way of making changes in each of ~30 > Google libraries with individual PRs [2]. > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> After the proposal is implemented, Beam project upgrades the > BOM version to upgrade these Google-related libraries. This still needs to > ensure the libraries in GCP Library BOM are compatible with Beam's other > dependencies. (Linkage Checker will help with this job.) I believe > onboarding GCP Libraries BOM will solve lots of incompatibilities which we > have seen in gax, gRPC, google-cloud-core, and so on with minimal effort in > Beam's developers. > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> Created an issue to track this: BEAM-9444 [3]. I appreciate > if you can share questions or feedback (thumbs-up / concerns). > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> [1]: > https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/cloud-opensource-java/wiki/The-Google-Cloud-Platform-Libraries-BOM > >>>>>>>> >>> [2]: > https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?page=1&q=is%3Apr+author%3Asuztomo > >>>>>>>> >>> [3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9444 > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> -- > >>>>>>>> >>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> >>> Tomo > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Tomo > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Regards, > >>> Tomo > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, > >> Tomo >
