I'm in favor of dropping "harness" and going with "sdk_container_image". I
don't feel like the word "harness" adds value or clarity.

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:34 AM Emily Ye <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> *tl;dr*: keep harness in user-facing container image flag names?
>
> I have a few PRs in-progress for "renaming" the
> workerHarnessContainerImage flag, i.e. adding a new flag and marking the
> old flag as deprecated. This is being done to better reflect the Portable
> framework.. I wanted to create a flag with the same usage (i.e. passing in
> a single image) - see proposal if you are curious [1].
>
> Python: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14575
> Java: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14557
>
> The names we are choosing between right now are:
>
>    - --sdk_container_image
>       - "Harness" doesn't mean anything to most users and is already a
>       confusing term, but mostly got carried over from legacy image names 
> where
>       as far as I can tell, we added harness to indicate it started the SDK
>       process/was different from (VM) worker images
>       - Portable runner uses "docker_container_image" currently for the
>       --environment_type=DOCKER --environment_config key
>    - --sdk_harness_container_image
>       - "Harness" is baked into a bunch of different places (other flag
>       --sdk_harness_container_image_overrides for providing multiple image
>       overrides, e.g. for xlang, Dataflow API objects refer to
>       workerHarnessContainerImage/sdkHarnessContainerImages)
>
> Right now the PRs are using sdk_container_image and we reached a small
> consensus about this in the proposal doc, but I wanted to see how strongly
> (within reasonable time frame) people felt we should keep harness for
> consistency's sake. As mentioned on the Python PR, we can also alias the
> other flag to not have harness in the name, but the Dataflow API still
> refers to harness objects.
>
> [1] go/beam-sdk-container-image-flag
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bGKu8w6Az_1QwLRrH-PfRydO4UqzYgNV4op5af_UdKE/edit?usp=sharing>
>
>
> Thanks!
> -Emily
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to