This proposal is tracked as (only) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-818
Prerequisite sub-tasks are tracked as BEAM-826 to BEAM-828. There may be more uses that I'm missing, but PubSubIO, Write, and BigQueryIO are the three places I'm sure that options from the Pipeline are used. On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > In the spirit of some recent conversations about tracking proposals like > this, are there JIRAs you can [file and then] mention on this thread? > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:07 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com> wrote: > > > Yea +1. Definitely a real prerequisite to a true runner-independent > graph. > > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 1:24 PM Amit Sela <amitsel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:43 PM Robert Bradshaw > > <rober...@google.com.invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > j...@nanthrax.net > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> +1 > > > >> > > > >> Agree > > > >> > > > >> Regards > > > >> JB > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Oct 25, 2016, 12:01, at 12:01, Aljoscha Krettek < > > aljos...@apache.org > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> >+1 This sounds quite straightforward. > > > >> > > > > >> >On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 at 01:36 Thomas Groh <tg...@google.com.invalid > > > > > >> >wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >> Hey everyone, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> I've been working on a declaration of intent for how we want to > use > > > >> >> PipelineOptions and an API change to be consistent with that > > intent. > > > >> >This > > > >> >> is generally part of the move to the Runner API, specifically the > > > >> >desire to > > > >> >> be able to reuse Pipelines and the ability to choose runner at > the > > > >> >time of > > > >> >> the call to run. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> The high-level summary is I wan to remove the > > > >> >Pipeline.getPipelineOptions > > > >> >> method. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> I believe this will be compatible with other in-flight proposals, > > > >> >> especially Dynamic PipelineOptions, but would love to see what > > > >> >everyone > > > >> >> else thinks. The document is available at the link below. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wr05cYdqnCfrLLqSk- > > > >> -XmGMGgDwwNwWZaFbxLKvPqEQ/edit?usp=sharing > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Thanks, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Thomas > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
