Thanks Robert. Bowen, in the spirit of remaining neutral, I decided to put them in alphabetical order.
Seth > On Dec 20, 2019, at 3:34 AM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > > I've assigned you to the ticket. > You've convinced me that the "Deployment Model" thing was not a good idea. > >> On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 5:35 AM Bowen Li <bowenl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Really cool. I especially like the list of tags on "Ververica Platform"! >> >> BTW, why is "Ververica Platform" placed at the last? I won't feel bothered >> if we move it to the top. >> >>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 5:56 PM Seth Wiesman <sjwies...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I'm not sure, I think most all the options other than EMR abstract that >>> component away. >>> >>> I've also opened a ticket if a commiter could please assign it to my >> Jira: >>> sjwiesman >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15337 >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 10:29 AM Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I was actually referring to "YARN", "Kubernetes", "Mesos". >>>> If people know that AWS EMR is using YARN, they know which >> documentation >>> to >>>> look for in Flink. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 4:26 PM Konstantin Knauf < >>> konstan...@ververica.com >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 This gives a better overview of the deployment targets and shows >> our >>>>> prospective users that they can rely on a broad set of vendors, if >> help >>>> is >>>>> needed. >>>>> >>>>> I guess, Robert means if the vendor offers a managed service (like >> AWS >>>>> Kinesis Analytics), or licenses software (like Ververica Platform). >>> This >>>>> would be beneficial, but on the other hand the categories/terms >>> (managed, >>>>> hosted, "serverless", self-managed) are not so well-defined in my >>>>> experience. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 10:46 PM Seth Wiesman <sjwies...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Happy to see there seems to be a consensus. >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert, can you elaborate on what you mean by "deployment model"? >>>>>> >>>>>> Seth >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:19 PM Robert Metzger < >> rmetz...@apache.org >>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 to the general idea >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe we could add "Deployment Model" in addition to "Supported >>>>>>> Environments" as properties for the vendors. >>>>>>> I'd say Cloudera, Eventador and Huawei [1] are missing from this >>> page >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1]https://www.huaweicloud.com/en-us/product/cs.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 5:05 PM Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 for your proposed solution, Seth! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 3:05 PM Till Rohrmann < >>>> trohrm...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for continuing this discussion Seth. I like the mockup >>>> and I >>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>> this is a good improvement. Modulo the completeness check, +1 >>> for >>>>>>>> offering >>>>>>>>> links to 3rd party integrations. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> Till >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 6:04 PM Seth Wiesman < >>>> sjwies...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This discussion is a follow up to the previous thread on >>>> dropping >>>>>>>>>> vendor-specific documentation[1]. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The conversation ended unresolved on the question of what >> we >>>>> should >>>>>>>>> provide >>>>>>>>>> on the Apache Flink docs. The consensus seemed to be moving >>>>> towards >>>>>>>>>> offering a table with links to 3rd parties. After an >> offline >>>>>>>> conversation >>>>>>>>>> with Robert, I have drafted a mock-up of what that might >> look >>>>>>> like[2]. >>>>>>>>>> Please note that I included a few vendors that I could >> think >>> of >>>>> off >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> top >>>>>>>>>> of my head, the list in this picture is not complete but >> that >>>> is >>>>>> not >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> conversation we are having here. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There are three competing goals that we are trying to >> achieve >>>>> here. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1) Provide information to users that vendor support is >>>> available >>>>> as >>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>>>> be important in growing adoption within enterprises >>>>>>>>>> 2) Be maintainable by the open-source Flink community >>>>>>>>>> 3) Remain neutral >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please let me know what you think >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Seth >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Drop-vendor-specific-deployment-documentation-td35457.html >>>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/sjwiesman/bb90f0765148c15051bcc91092367851/raw/42c0a1e9240f1c5808a053f8ff5965828cca96d5/mockup.png >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Konstantin Knauf | Solutions Architect >>>>> >>>>> +49 160 91394525 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Follow us @VervericaData Ververica <https://www.ververica.com/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Join Flink Forward <https://flink-forward.org/> - The Apache Flink >>>>> Conference >>>>> >>>>> Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Ververica GmbH | Invalidenstrasse 115, 10115 Berlin, Germany >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Ververica GmbH >>>>> Registered at Amtsgericht Charlottenburg: HRB 158244 B >>>>> Managing Directors: Timothy Alexander Steinert, Yip Park Tung Jason, >> Ji >>>>> (Tony) Cheng >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
