Cool. Right now the list is empty. Do you already have a list you could include in the upcoming pull request? :)
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I just started this. Please see > https://github.com/mjsax/flink-web/tree/flink-external-page > > I think, it is the best way to extend the "Downloads" page. I would also > add a link to this on the main page's "Getting Started" section. > > As a first try, I started like this: >> Third party packages >> >> This is a list of third party packages (ie, libraries, system extensions, or >> examples) build for Flink. The Flink community only collects links to those >> packages but does not maintain them. Thus, they do not belong to the Apache >> Flink project and the community cannot give any support for them. >> Package Name >> >> Available for Flink 0.8.x and 0.9.x >> >> Short description >> >> Please let us know, if we missed to list your package. Be aware, that we >> might remove listed packages without notice. > > Can you please give me some input, what projects I should add initially? > > > -Matthias > > > On 10/08/2015 04:03 PM, Maximilian Michels wrote: >> IMHO we can do that. There should be a disclaimer that the third party >> software is not officially supported. >> >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: >>> Should we add a new page at Flink project web page? >>> >>> On 10/08/2015 12:56 PM, Maximilian Michels wrote: >>>> +1 for your pragmatic approach, Vasia. A simple collection of third >>>> party software using Flink should be enough for now; of course, >>>> outside the Apache realm. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> +1 for Vasia’s suggestion. From a long-term perspective, the site like >>>>> Spark Packages [1] would be helpful to manage external contribution. >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://spark-packages.org >>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 8, 2015, at 12:28 PM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the feedback. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think, the repository does not need to build on a single Flink >>>>>> release. From my point of view, there should be a single parent module >>>>>> that contains *independent modules* for each extension/library (there >>>>>> should be no "cross dependencies" between the modules and each module >>>>>> can specify the flink dependencies it needs by itself). This make is >>>>>> most flexible. And if a library works on an old release, it might just >>>>>> stay there as is. If a library changes (due to Flink changes), it might >>>>>> just be contained multiple times for different Flink releases. >>>>>> >>>>>> Each module should provide a short doc (README) that shows how to use an >>>>>> integrate it with Flink. Thus, the responsibility goes to the >>>>>> contributor to maintain the library. If it breaks and is not maintained >>>>>> any further, we can simple remove it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree, that the community might not be able to maintain those >>>>>> extension/libraries right now. I would put the responsibility (more or >>>>>> less completely) on the contributor and delete project that do not fix >>>>>> any more. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Vasia: a link to a library could be included in the README. If anybody >>>>>> only wants to share a library but not contribute code, the parent README >>>>>> could contain a list of additional links. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -Matthias >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10/08/2015 12:15 PM, Vasiliki Kalavri wrote: >>>>>>> How about, for now, we simply create a page where we gather links/short >>>>>>> descriptions of all these contributions >>>>>>> and let the maintenance and dependency management to the tool/library >>>>>>> creators? >>>>>>> This way we will at least have these contributions in one place and >>>>>>> link to >>>>>>> them somewhere from the website. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Vasia. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8 October 2015 at 12:06, Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Matthias, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing up this idea. Actually, it has been discussed a >>>>>>>> couple of times on the mailing list whether we should have a central >>>>>>>> place for third-party extensions/contributions/libraries. This could >>>>>>>> either be something package-based or, like you proposed, another >>>>>>>> repository. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> An external place for contributions raises a couple of questions >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Which version should the external contributions be based on? >>>>>>>> - How do we make sure, the extensions are continuously updated? >>>>>>>> (dedicated maintainers or automatic compatibility checks) >>>>>>>> - How do we easily plug-in the external modules into Flink? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the long term, we really need a solution for these questions. The >>>>>>>> code base of Flink is growing and more and more packages go to >>>>>>>> flink-contrib/flink-staging. I would find something packaged-based >>>>>>>> better than a repository. Quite frankly, momentarily, I think >>>>>>>> developing such a plugin system is out of scope for most Flink >>>>>>>> developers. At the current pace of Flink development, collecting these >>>>>>>> contributions externally without properly maintaining them, doesn't >>>>>>>> make much sense to me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Max >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> many people are building quite exiting stuff on top of Flink. It is >>>>>>>>> hard >>>>>>>>> to keep an good overview on what stuff is available and what not. What >>>>>>>>> do you think about starting a second git repository "flink-external" >>>>>>>>> that collects all those code? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The ideas would be to collect stuff in a central point, such that >>>>>>>>> people >>>>>>>>> can access it easily and get an overview what is already available >>>>>>>>> (this >>>>>>>>> might also avoid duplicate development). It might also be a good point >>>>>>>>> to show common patterns. In order to collect as much as possible, the >>>>>>>>> contributing requirement (with respect to testing etc) could be lower >>>>>>>>> than for Flink itself. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For example, I recently started a small flink-clojure module with a >>>>>>>>> simple word-count example to answer a question on SO. Including this >>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>> Flink would not be appropriate. However, for a flink-external repro it >>>>>>>>> might be nice to have. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What do you think about it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -Matthias >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Chiwan Park >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >
