Github user elbamos commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/815#issuecomment-205943423
My preference is b because it imposes the least burden on users.
I think most R users will want spark integration, and I think we disagree
about which interpreters provide closer spark integration.
> On Apr 5, 2016, at 2:19 PM, Lee moon soo <notificati...@github.com> wrote:
>
> Regarding, name conflict, i can come up with some options.
>
> a. Keep the same name 'spark.r' for both SparkRInterpreter and RRepl.
> And let user select it in build time using maven profile, -Pr for RRepl,
-Psparkr for SparkRInterpreter, or select it in a runtime using
zeppelin.interpreters property in conf/zeppelin-site.xml
>
> b. Change SparkRInterpreter name to 'spark.sparkr', similar to
PySparkInterpreter uses the name 'spark.pyspark'
>
> c. Change RRepl, and KnitR name from 'spark.r', 'spark.knitr' -> 'r.r',
r.knitr'.
> And make RRepl and KnitR more like generic R support rather than SparkR
support. Similar to what ZEPPELIN-502 trying to do for python
>
> Personally, i'm good with all three options and prefer c) as a long term
plan, while my guess is many R users will use r without sparkr integration.
>
> What do you think?
>
> â
> You are receiving this because you commented.
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
>
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
