[INFO] Build is broken on the archetypes

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi guys,

due to the last changes on the IOChannelFactory and the Beam filesystems, the 
build is broken on the archetypes:


[INFO] [ERROR] 
/home/jbonofre/Workspace/beam/sdks/java/maven-archetypes/examples/target/test-classes/projects/basic/project/basic/src/main/java/it/pkg/common/WriteWindowedFilesDoFn.java:[28,32] 
cannot find symbol

[INFO] [ERROR] symbol:   class IOChannelFactory
[INFO] [ERROR] location: package org.apache.beam.sdk.util
[INFO] [ERROR] -> [Help 1]
[INFO] org.apache.maven.lifecycle.LifecycleExecutionException: Failed to execute 
goal org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin:3.5.1:compile 
(default-compile) on project basic: Compilation failure
[INFO] 
/home/jbonofre/Workspace/beam/sdks/java/maven-archetypes/examples/target/test-classes/projects/basic/project/basic/src/main/java/it/pkg/common/WriteWindowedFilesDoFn.java:[28,32] 
cannot find symbol

[INFO]   symbol:   class IOChannelFactory
[INFO]   location: package org.apache.beam.sdk.util

I have a pull request that I will submit in a couple of minutes.

Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: Future processing time timers and final watermark

[Thomas Groh]

Generally you shouldn't need to hold the watermark. The fact that the input
watermark of the DoFn has advanced to the final watermark (i.e. positive
infinity) means that all of the windows expire. At this point, any window
with buffered data that is not finished should have its remaining elements
output. The remaining processing time timers should have nothing to do at
that point, and can be safely dropped.

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 9:57 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> While working on SDF support in the Apex runner, I see the scenario where
> processing time timers are set in the future. These never trigger, the
> topology exits with the final watermark before.
>
> What is the correct way to handle this? Should the final watermark be held
> until all processing time timers are cleared?
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
>

Re: Seeking help for running bash script in Maven

[Davor Bonaci]

I don't believe this has anything to do with Maven. Maven isn't passing any
arguments to the script, or anything similar.

Script's location is figured out here:
HERE="$(dirname $0)"

and then used to like this:
ARCHETYPE_ROOT="${HERE}/src/main/resources/archetype-resources"
mkdir -p "$ARCHETYPE_ROOT/src/main/java"

This sounds like a bash issue, which you should be able to reproduce
locally with a similarly-named directory.

Hope this helps.

Davor

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Mark Liu 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm working on bringing Java build cross JDK versions to Jenkins. However,
> I get stuck on BEAM-2164
>  which
> is running bash script failed though exec-maven-plugin. In order to have
> cross-JDK builds on Jenkins, project directory contains space characters,
> which breaks this bash script
>  maven-archetypes/examples/generate-sources.sh>
> when
> building beam-sdks-java-maven-archetypes-examples module.
>
> I got following error log from build
>  Versions_Test/jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),label=beam/6/console>
> :
>
> rsync: change_dir
> > "/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/beam_PostCommit_
> Java_JDK_Versions_Test/jdk\#012.\#012(latest)/label/beam/
> sdks/java/maven-archetypes/examples/../../../../examples/
> java/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/examples"
> > failed: No such file or directory (2)
>
>
> The problem happens in executing "mkdir -p "${ARCHETYPE_ROOT}/src/main/
> java"
> ". ${ARCHETYPE_ROOT} contains space character and the directory isn't
> created. I run the script through commandline (without using mvn) and it
> works perfectly. Looks like exec-maven-plugin handles this situation in
> different ways, but I'm not the expert of Maven and play around commands in
> the script doesn't help.
>
> Currently I totally have no ideas. I'll be very appreciate if anyone can
> provide some hint.
>
> Thanks!
> Mark
>

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[María García Herrero]

The bigger letters aimed to indicate "strongly in favor of" as opposed to
"weakly in favor of." I'm OK with not using a doc, just responding to Ted's
question.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:

> What's the difference between first and second, third and fourth columns ?
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:36 PM, María García Herrero <
> mari...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the suggestion, Ted. Get your vote in here
> >  > Wqz5B6eQ40TEgk/edit?usp=sharing>
> > .
> > I have already added all the votes that Davor compiled 3 hours ago and
> the
> > responses afterwards.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe create a google doc with columns as the camps.
> > >
> > > Each person can put his/her name under the camp in his/her favor.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > sent from mobile
> > > > On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine
> with
> > > > 2.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik
> >  > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> > > >  > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll join Davor's group.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> da...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's
> > > > re-examine
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > after some time has passed.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the
> > > summary:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * Aljoscha
> > > > > > > > * Dan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * Davor
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * Amit
> > > > > > > > * Jesse
> > > > > > > > * JB
> > > > > > > > * Ted
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any additional opinions?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Davor
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela <
> > amitsel...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be
> very
> > > > clear
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is
> not
> > as
> > > > > > mature
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than
> others,
> > > some
> > > > > run
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community
> usually
> > > > > expects
> > > > > > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as
> we
> > do
> > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out
> more
> > > use
> > > > > > > > scenarios
> > > > > > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is
> > > > > released
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > indeed stable.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0
> > release
> > > > > > compared
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > 1.0 release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> > > da...@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this
> topic.
> > > > This
> > > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to
> > > rephrase
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone
> > think
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on,
> in
> > > your
> > > > > > > > opinion,
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the
> > > > negative
> > > > > > > impact
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > the less desirable alternative please?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Manu Zhang]

Slight preference for 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0

Thanks,
Manu

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 7:24 AM Chamikara Jayalath 
wrote:

> +1 for 2.0.0 for following reason.
>
> I think the main Downside for using 2.0.0 is the fact that people
> incorrectly assuming this to be the second stable release. This can be
> easily clarified through documentation. I think Beam is more mature than a
> product that is moving from an unstable 0.9 to the first stable 1.0.0
> release.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Thanks,
> Cham
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:47 PM Davor Bonaci  wrote:
>
> > Let's not use the side document, please. The document has to be
> > world-writable, and accidental changes can occur.
> >
> > I'd kindly ask to use email for this one, as usual, to keep a record (in
> > this specific case).
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> > > What's the difference between first and second, third and fourth
> columns
> > ?
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:36 PM, María García Herrero <
> > > mari...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for the suggestion, Ted. Get your vote in here
> > > >  > > > Wqz5B6eQ40TEgk/edit?usp=sharing>
> > > > .
> > > > I have already added all the votes that Davor compiled 3 hours ago
> and
> > > the
> > > > responses afterwards.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe create a google doc with columns as the camps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Each person can put his/her name under the camp in his/her favor.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Thomas Weise 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > sent from mobile
> > > > > > On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu" 
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine
> > > with
> > > > > > 2.0.0.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik
> > > >  > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> > > > > >  > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'll join Davor's group.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> > > da...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's
> > > > > > re-examine
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > after some time has passed.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the
> > > > > summary:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > > > * Aljoscha
> > > > > > > > > > * Dan
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > > > > > > > > > * Davor
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > > > * Amit
> > > > > > > > > > * Jesse
> > > > > > > > > > * JB
> > > > > > > > > > * Ted
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Any additional opinions?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Davor
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela <
> > > > amitsel...@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to
> be
> > > very
> > > > > > clear
> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK
> is
> > > not
> > > > as
> > > > > > > > mature
> > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than
> > > others,
> > > > > some
> > > > > > > run
> > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community
> > > usually
> > > > > > > expects
> > > > > > > > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long
> as
> > > we
> > > > do
> > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu <
> > yuzhih...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying
> out
> > > more
> > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > > scenarios
> > > > > > > > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure
> what
> > is
> > > > > > > released
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > indeed 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Chamikara Jayalath]

+1 for 2.0.0 for following reason.

I think the main Downside for using 2.0.0 is the fact that people
incorrectly assuming this to be the second stable release. This can be
easily clarified through documentation. I think Beam is more mature than a
product that is moving from an unstable 0.9 to the first stable 1.0.0
release.

Just my 2 cents.

Thanks,
Cham



On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:47 PM Davor Bonaci  wrote:

> Let's not use the side document, please. The document has to be
> world-writable, and accidental changes can occur.
>
> I'd kindly ask to use email for this one, as usual, to keep a record (in
> this specific case).
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:
>
> > What's the difference between first and second, third and fourth columns
> ?
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:36 PM, María García Herrero <
> > mari...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the suggestion, Ted. Get your vote in here
> > >  > > Wqz5B6eQ40TEgk/edit?usp=sharing>
> > > .
> > > I have already added all the votes that Davor compiled 3 hours ago and
> > the
> > > responses afterwards.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Maybe create a google doc with columns as the camps.
> > > >
> > > > Each person can put his/her name under the camp in his/her favor.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Thomas Weise 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > sent from mobile
> > > > > On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine
> > with
> > > > > 2.0.0.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik
> > >  > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> > > > >  > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'll join Davor's group.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> > da...@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's
> > > > > re-examine
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > after some time has passed.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the
> > > > summary:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > > * Aljoscha
> > > > > > > > > * Dan
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > > > > > > > > * Davor
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > > * Amit
> > > > > > > > > * Jesse
> > > > > > > > > * JB
> > > > > > > > > * Ted
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Any additional opinions?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Davor
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela <
> > > amitsel...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be
> > very
> > > > > clear
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is
> > not
> > > as
> > > > > > > mature
> > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than
> > others,
> > > > some
> > > > > > run
> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community
> > usually
> > > > > > expects
> > > > > > > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as
> > we
> > > do
> > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu <
> yuzhih...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out
> > more
> > > > use
> > > > > > > > > scenarios
> > > > > > > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what
> is
> > > > > > released
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > indeed stable.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0
> > > release
> > > > > > > compared
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > 1.0 release.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> > > > da...@apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this
> > 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Davor Bonaci]

Let's not use the side document, please. The document has to be
world-writable, and accidental changes can occur.

I'd kindly ask to use email for this one, as usual, to keep a record (in
this specific case).

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:

> What's the difference between first and second, third and fourth columns ?
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:36 PM, María García Herrero <
> mari...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the suggestion, Ted. Get your vote in here
> >  > Wqz5B6eQ40TEgk/edit?usp=sharing>
> > .
> > I have already added all the votes that Davor compiled 3 hours ago and
> the
> > responses afterwards.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe create a google doc with columns as the camps.
> > >
> > > Each person can put his/her name under the camp in his/her favor.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > sent from mobile
> > > > On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine
> with
> > > > 2.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik
> >  > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> > > >  > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll join Davor's group.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> da...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's
> > > > re-examine
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > after some time has passed.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the
> > > summary:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * Aljoscha
> > > > > > > > * Dan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * Davor
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * Amit
> > > > > > > > * Jesse
> > > > > > > > * JB
> > > > > > > > * Ted
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any additional opinions?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Davor
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela <
> > amitsel...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be
> very
> > > > clear
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is
> not
> > as
> > > > > > mature
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than
> others,
> > > some
> > > > > run
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community
> usually
> > > > > expects
> > > > > > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as
> we
> > do
> > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out
> more
> > > use
> > > > > > > > scenarios
> > > > > > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is
> > > > > released
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > indeed stable.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0
> > release
> > > > > > compared
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > 1.0 release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> > > da...@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this
> topic.
> > > > This
> > > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to
> > > rephrase
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone
> > think
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on,
> in
> > > your
> > > > > > > > opinion,
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the
> > > > negative
> > > > > > > impact
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > the less desirable 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Ted Yu]

What's the difference between first and second, third and fourth columns ?

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:36 PM, María García Herrero <
mari...@google.com.invalid> wrote:

> Thanks for the suggestion, Ted. Get your vote in here
>  Wqz5B6eQ40TEgk/edit?usp=sharing>
> .
> I have already added all the votes that Davor compiled 3 hours ago and the
> responses afterwards.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Ted Yu  wrote:
>
> > Maybe create a google doc with columns as the camps.
> >
> > Each person can put his/her name under the camp in his/her favor.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
> >
> > > I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.
> > >
> > > --
> > > sent from mobile
> > > On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine with
> > > 2.0.0.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik
>  > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles
> > >  > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'll join Davor's group.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's
> > > re-examine
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > after some time has passed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the
> > summary:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > * Aljoscha
> > > > > > > * Dan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > > > > > > * Davor
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > * Amit
> > > > > > > * Jesse
> > > > > > > * JB
> > > > > > > * Ted
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any additional opinions?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Davor
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela <
> amitsel...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be very
> > > clear
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is not
> as
> > > > > mature
> > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than others,
> > some
> > > > run
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community usually
> > > > expects
> > > > > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as we
> do
> > > > some
> > > > > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out more
> > use
> > > > > > > scenarios
> > > > > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is
> > > > released
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > indeed stable.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0
> release
> > > > > compared
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > 1.0 release.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci <
> > da...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this topic.
> > > This
> > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to
> > rephrase
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone
> think
> > > the
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on, in
> > your
> > > > > > > opinion,
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the
> > > negative
> > > > > > impact
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > the less desirable alternative please?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (I understand this may be pushing it a bit, but I think a
> > > > > possible
> > > > > > > > > > consensus on this is worth it. Personally, I'll stay away
> > > from
> > > > > > > weighing
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > on this topic.)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> > > > > > > aljos...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I prefer 2.0.0 for the first stable release. It totally
> > > makes
> > > > > > sense
> > > > > > > > 

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Mark Liu]

Congratulation Davor

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 11:09 AM, María García Herrero <
mari...@google.com.invalid> wrote:

> Wow! Congratulations, Davor!
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Ahmet Altay 
> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations, well deserved!
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andrew Psaltis <
> psaltis.and...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Congrats Davor!
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Melissa Pashniak <
> > > meliss...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Congratulations Davor!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert Bradshaw <
> > > > rober...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Congratulations, Davor! Well deserved.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Hadar Hod
>  > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Congrats, Davor!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Chamikara Jayalath <
> > > > chamik...@apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Congrats Davor. Very well deserved.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> - Cham
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 8:51 AM tarush grover <
> > tarushappt...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Congrats Davor
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Regards,
> > > > > >> > Tarush
> > > > > >> > On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry <
> > fran...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > > Woohoo! So well deserved.
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot <
> > > > > echauc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >
> > > > > >> > > > Congratulations Davor!
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > Well deserved indeed!
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > >> Congratulations!
> > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise <
> > t...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > >> > > >> Congrats!
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> > > > > >> > > >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >>> Congrats!!
> > > > > >> > >  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu <
> > > > mingm...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > >  Congratulations @Davor!
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela <
> > > amitsel...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > >> > > >> Congratulations Davor!
> > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee <
> > > > > lzljs3620...@aliyun.com
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > > Congratulations!
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > 
> > > --
> > > > > >> > > >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
> > > > > >> > > >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> > > > > >> > > >>> To:dev 
> > > > > >> > > >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> > > > > >> > > >>> Congrats!
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
> > > > > >> > aljos...@apache.org
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > >> Congrats! :-)
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles
> > > > > >> >  > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > >  wrote:
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > > Awesome!
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu <
> > > > > yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
> > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur <
> > > > > >> > aviem...@gmail.com
> > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > > > Congrats Davor! :)
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste
> > > Onofré <
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > >  wrote:
> > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > >> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > >  Regards
> > > > > >> > >  JB
> > > > > >> > > 
> > > > > >> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > > > > >> > > 

Re: Slack Invites

[Davor Bonaci]

Off-topic:
The most annoying thing (to me) is that Slack's auto-detection of
self-invite bots is very sensitive to frequent invites of just one member.
When this activates, we get blocked from inviting more people and we have
to contact Slack support to unblock further invites. They resolve it very
quickly, but reaching out is a pain. So, for now, when inviting others,
please try to batch multiple invites, which would hopefully reduce the
occurrence frequency.

On-topic:
We shouldn't try to work around Slack's design and deploy auto-invite
functionality. That said, many email domains are automatically approved,
including apache.org. So, any committer on any project can join without
trouble. (Gmail cannot be added, unfortunately.)

Many projects use HipChat, which is the only tool supported by Infra.

Overall, I'm not happy with the invite/management burden of Slack, but
given Slack's popularity these days and high switching costs, I think I
favor status-quo.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Vladisav Jelisavcic 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Apache Ignite [1] is using Gitter, and it seems to work really well.
>
> Best regards,
> Vladisav
>
> [1] https://gitter.im/apacheignite/ignite
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Jason Kuster  invalid
> > wrote:
>
> > Gitter does look like it solves many of the challenges we've been facing
> > and looks like it's had wide adoption in some open-source communities. I
> > haven't found any other official Apache projects using it, so we could be
> > the vanguard here.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Eric Anderson  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > While on the topic: Have we considered alternatives like Gitter
> > > ? I'm not very familiar with Slack or Gitter, but
> > Gitter
> > > advertises being a little friendlier to open invites.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:38 AM Dan Halperin
>  > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > My understanding is that if you use something like that plugin, and
> > they
> > > > detect it, Slack will ban you from new invites entirely or otherwise
> > > punish
> > > > you. They want this friction for free projects so that there's
> pressure
> > > to
> > > > pay.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Jesse Anderson <
> > > je...@bigdatainstitute.io>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is possible to change how Slack invites are handled? This might
> > > encourage
> > > > > our community contributions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Right now, people have to email in (causing extra dev@/user@
> > emails).
> > > I
> > > > > did
> > > > > a quick search and found this 
> so
> > > > > people
> > > > > can invite themselves.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Jesse
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Jesse
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ---
> > Jason Kuster
> > Apache Beam / Google Cloud Dataflow
> >
>

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Ted Yu]

Maybe create a google doc with columns as the camps.

Each person can put his/her name under the camp in his/her favor.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:

> I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.
>
> --
> sent from mobile
> On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu"  wrote:
>
> > I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine with
> 2.0.0.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles
>  > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'll join Davor's group.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's
> re-examine
> > > this
> > > > > after some time has passed.
> > > > >
> > > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the summary:
> > > > >
> > > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > > > > * Aljoscha
> > > > > * Dan
> > > > >
> > > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > > > > * Davor
> > > > >
> > > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> > > > >
> > > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > > > > * Amit
> > > > > * Jesse
> > > > > * JB
> > > > > * Ted
> > > > >
> > > > > Any additional opinions?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > Davor
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be very
> clear
> > > on
> > > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is not as
> > > mature
> > > > as
> > > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than others, some
> > run
> > > > on
> > > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community usually
> > expects
> > > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as we do
> > some
> > > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu 
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out more use
> > > > > scenarios
> > > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is
> > released
> > > is
> > > > > > > indeed stable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0 release
> > > compared
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > 1.0 release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this topic.
> This
> > > > issue
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to rephrase
> > the
> > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone think
> the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on, in your
> > > > > opinion,
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the
> negative
> > > > impact
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > the less desirable alternative please?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (I understand this may be pushing it a bit, but I think a
> > > possible
> > > > > > > > consensus on this is worth it. Personally, I'll stay away
> from
> > > > > weighing
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > on this topic.)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> > > > > aljos...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I prefer 2.0.0 for the first stable release. It totally
> makes
> > > > sense
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > people coming from Dataflow 1.x and I can already envision
> > the
> > > > > > > confusion
> > > > > > > > > between Beam 1.5 and Dataflow 1.5.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 at 07:42 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Davor,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > For a Beam community perspective, 1.0.0 would make more
> > > sense.
> > > > We
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > fair number of people starting with Beam (without knowing
> > > > > > Dataflow).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > However, as Dataflow SDK (origins of Beam) was in 1.0.0,
> in
> > > > order
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > avoid confusion with users coming to Beam from Dataflow,
> > > 2.0.0
> > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > help.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have a preference to 1.0.0 anyway, but I would
> understand
> > > > > > starting
> > > > > > > > > > from 2.0.0.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Ismaël Mejía]

My vote, like Davor:
Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
> I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.
>
> --
> sent from mobile
> On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu"  wrote:
>
>> I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine with 2.0.0.
>>
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles > >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I'll join Davor's group.
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's re-examine
>> > this
>> > > > after some time has passed.
>> > > >
>> > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the summary:
>> > > >
>> > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
>> > > > * Aljoscha
>> > > > * Dan
>> > > >
>> > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
>> > > > * Davor
>> > > >
>> > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
>> > > >
>> > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
>> > > > * Amit
>> > > > * Jesse
>> > > > * JB
>> > > > * Ted
>> > > >
>> > > > Any additional opinions?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks!
>> > > >
>> > > > Davor
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela 
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be very clear
>> > on
>> > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is not as
>> > mature
>> > > as
>> > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than others, some
>> run
>> > > on
>> > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community usually
>> expects
>> > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as we do
>> some
>> > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu  wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out more use
>> > > > scenarios
>> > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is
>> released
>> > is
>> > > > > > indeed stable.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0 release
>> > compared
>> > > > to
>> > > > > > 1.0 release.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this topic. This
>> > > issue
>> > > > is
>> > > > > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to rephrase
>> the
>> > > > > question
>> > > > > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone think the
>> > > > project
>> > > > > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on, in your
>> > > > opinion,
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the negative
>> > > impact
>> > > > > of
>> > > > > > > the less desirable alternative please?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > (I understand this may be pushing it a bit, but I think a
>> > possible
>> > > > > > > consensus on this is worth it. Personally, I'll stay away from
>> > > > weighing
>> > > > > > in
>> > > > > > > on this topic.)
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
>> > > > aljos...@apache.org>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I prefer 2.0.0 for the first stable release. It totally makes
>> > > sense
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > > > > people coming from Dataflow 1.x and I can already envision
>> the
>> > > > > > confusion
>> > > > > > > > between Beam 1.5 and Dataflow 1.5.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 at 07:42 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > j...@nanthrax.net>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Hi Davor,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > For a Beam community perspective, 1.0.0 would make more
>> > sense.
>> > > We
>> > > > > > have
>> > > > > > > a
>> > > > > > > > > fair number of people starting with Beam (without knowing
>> > > > > Dataflow).
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > However, as Dataflow SDK (origins of Beam) was in 1.0.0, in
>> > > order
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > avoid confusion with users coming to Beam from Dataflow,
>> > 2.0.0
>> > > > > could
>> > > > > > > > help.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I have a preference to 1.0.0 anyway, but I would understand
>> > > > > starting
>> > > > > > > > > from 2.0.0.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > > > JB
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > On 03/01/2017 07:56 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > The first stable release is our next major project-wide
>> > goal;
>> > > > see
>> > > > 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Thomas Weise]

I'm in the relaxed 1.0.0 camp.

--
sent from mobile
On May 4, 2017 12:29 PM, "Mingmin Xu"  wrote:

> I slightly prefer1.0.0 for the *first* stable release, but fine with 2.0.0.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Lukasz Cwik 
> wrote:
>
> > Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'll join Davor's group.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's re-examine
> > this
> > > > after some time has passed.
> > > >
> > > > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the summary:
> > > >
> > > > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > > > * Aljoscha
> > > > * Dan
> > > >
> > > > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > > > * Davor
> > > >
> > > > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> > > >
> > > > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > > > * Amit
> > > > * Jesse
> > > > * JB
> > > > * Ted
> > > >
> > > > Any additional opinions?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Davor
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be very clear
> > on
> > > > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is not as
> > mature
> > > as
> > > > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than others, some
> run
> > > on
> > > > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community usually
> expects
> > > > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as we do
> some
> > > > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out more use
> > > > scenarios
> > > > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is
> released
> > is
> > > > > > indeed stable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0 release
> > compared
> > > > to
> > > > > > 1.0 release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this topic. This
> > > issue
> > > > is
> > > > > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to rephrase
> the
> > > > > question
> > > > > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone think the
> > > > project
> > > > > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on, in your
> > > > opinion,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the negative
> > > impact
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the less desirable alternative please?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (I understand this may be pushing it a bit, but I think a
> > possible
> > > > > > > consensus on this is worth it. Personally, I'll stay away from
> > > > weighing
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > on this topic.)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> > > > aljos...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I prefer 2.0.0 for the first stable release. It totally makes
> > > sense
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > people coming from Dataflow 1.x and I can already envision
> the
> > > > > > confusion
> > > > > > > > between Beam 1.5 and Dataflow 1.5.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 at 07:42 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi Davor,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > For a Beam community perspective, 1.0.0 would make more
> > sense.
> > > We
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > fair number of people starting with Beam (without knowing
> > > > > Dataflow).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > However, as Dataflow SDK (origins of Beam) was in 1.0.0, in
> > > order
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > avoid confusion with users coming to Beam from Dataflow,
> > 2.0.0
> > > > > could
> > > > > > > > help.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have a preference to 1.0.0 anyway, but I would understand
> > > > > starting
> > > > > > > > > from 2.0.0.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 03/01/2017 07:56 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > The first stable release is our next major project-wide
> > goal;
> > > > see
> > > > > > > > > > discussion in [1]. I've been referring to it as "the
> first
> > > > stable
> > > > > > > > > release"
> > > > > > > > > > for a long time, not "1.0.0" or "2.0.0" or "2017" or
> > > something
> > > > > > else,
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > make sure we have an unbiased discussion and a

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Lukasz Cwik]

Put me under Strongly for 2.0.0

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles 
wrote:

> I'll join Davor's group.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci  wrote:
>
> > I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's re-examine this
> > after some time has passed.
> >
> > If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the summary:
> >
> > Strongly for 2.0.0:
> > * Aljoscha
> > * Dan
> >
> > Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> > * Davor
> >
> > Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
> >
> > Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> > * Amit
> > * Jesse
> > * JB
> > * Ted
> >
> > Any additional opinions?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Davor
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela  wrote:
> >
> > > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be very clear on
> > > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is not as mature
> as
> > > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than others, some run
> on
> > > YARN better than others, etc.
> > >
> > > My only reservation here is that the Apache community usually expects
> > > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as we do some
> > > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu  wrote:
> > >
> > > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out more use
> > scenarios
> > > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is released is
> > > > indeed stable.
> > > >
> > > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0 release compared
> > to
> > > > 1.0 release.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this topic. This
> issue
> > is
> > > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to rephrase the
> > > question
> > > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone think the
> > project
> > > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on, in your
> > opinion,
> > > > the
> > > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the negative
> impact
> > > of
> > > > > the less desirable alternative please?
> > > > >
> > > > > (I understand this may be pushing it a bit, but I think a possible
> > > > > consensus on this is worth it. Personally, I'll stay away from
> > weighing
> > > > in
> > > > > on this topic.)
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> > aljos...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I prefer 2.0.0 for the first stable release. It totally makes
> sense
> > > for
> > > > > > people coming from Dataflow 1.x and I can already envision the
> > > > confusion
> > > > > > between Beam 1.5 and Dataflow 1.5.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 at 07:42 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Davor,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For a Beam community perspective, 1.0.0 would make more sense.
> We
> > > > have
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > fair number of people starting with Beam (without knowing
> > > Dataflow).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, as Dataflow SDK (origins of Beam) was in 1.0.0, in
> order
> > > to
> > > > > > > avoid confusion with users coming to Beam from Dataflow, 2.0.0
> > > could
> > > > > > help.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have a preference to 1.0.0 anyway, but I would understand
> > > starting
> > > > > > > from 2.0.0.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 03/01/2017 07:56 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote:
> > > > > > > > The first stable release is our next major project-wide goal;
> > see
> > > > > > > > discussion in [1]. I've been referring to it as "the first
> > stable
> > > > > > > release"
> > > > > > > > for a long time, not "1.0.0" or "2.0.0" or "2017" or
> something
> > > > else,
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > make sure we have an unbiased discussion and a
> consensus-based
> > > > > decision
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > this matter.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think that now is the time to consider the appropriate
> > > > designation
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > our first stable release, and formally make a decision on
> it. A
> > > > > > > reasonable
> > > > > > > > choices could be "1.0.0" or "2.0.0", perhaps there are
> others.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * It logically comes after the current series, 0.x.y.
> > > > > > > > * Most people would expect it, I suppose.
> > > > > > > > * A possible confusion between Dataflow SDKs and Beam SDKs
> > > carrying
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > same number.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > > * Follows the pattern some other projects have taken --
> > > continuing
> > > > > > their
> > > > > > > > version numbering 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Kenneth Knowles]

I'll join Davor's group.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Davor Bonaci  wrote:

> I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's re-examine this
> after some time has passed.
>
> If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the summary:
>
> Strongly for 2.0.0:
> * Aljoscha
> * Dan
>
> Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
> * Davor
>
> Strongly for 1.0.0: none.
>
> Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
> * Amit
> * Jesse
> * JB
> * Ted
>
> Any additional opinions?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Davor
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela  wrote:
>
> > If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be very clear on
> > maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is not as mature as
> > Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than others, some run on
> > YARN better than others, etc.
> >
> > My only reservation here is that the Apache community usually expects
> > version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as we do some
> > "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> > > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out more use
> scenarios
> > > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is released is
> > > indeed stable.
> > >
> > > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0 release compared
> to
> > > 1.0 release.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci  wrote:
> > >
> > > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this topic. This issue
> is
> > > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to rephrase the
> > question
> > > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > > >
> > > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone think the
> project
> > > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on, in your
> opinion,
> > > the
> > > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the negative impact
> > of
> > > > the less desirable alternative please?
> > > >
> > > > (I understand this may be pushing it a bit, but I think a possible
> > > > consensus on this is worth it. Personally, I'll stay away from
> weighing
> > > in
> > > > on this topic.)
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> aljos...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I prefer 2.0.0 for the first stable release. It totally makes sense
> > for
> > > > > people coming from Dataflow 1.x and I can already envision the
> > > confusion
> > > > > between Beam 1.5 and Dataflow 1.5.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 at 07:42 Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Davor,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For a Beam community perspective, 1.0.0 would make more sense. We
> > > have
> > > > a
> > > > > > fair number of people starting with Beam (without knowing
> > Dataflow).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, as Dataflow SDK (origins of Beam) was in 1.0.0, in order
> > to
> > > > > > avoid confusion with users coming to Beam from Dataflow, 2.0.0
> > could
> > > > > help.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have a preference to 1.0.0 anyway, but I would understand
> > starting
> > > > > > from 2.0.0.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 03/01/2017 07:56 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote:
> > > > > > > The first stable release is our next major project-wide goal;
> see
> > > > > > > discussion in [1]. I've been referring to it as "the first
> stable
> > > > > > release"
> > > > > > > for a long time, not "1.0.0" or "2.0.0" or "2017" or something
> > > else,
> > > > to
> > > > > > > make sure we have an unbiased discussion and a consensus-based
> > > > decision
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > this matter.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think that now is the time to consider the appropriate
> > > designation
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > our first stable release, and formally make a decision on it. A
> > > > > > reasonable
> > > > > > > choices could be "1.0.0" or "2.0.0", perhaps there are others.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1.0.0:
> > > > > > > * It logically comes after the current series, 0.x.y.
> > > > > > > * Most people would expect it, I suppose.
> > > > > > > * A possible confusion between Dataflow SDKs and Beam SDKs
> > carrying
> > > > the
> > > > > > > same number.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2.0.0:
> > > > > > > * Follows the pattern some other projects have taken --
> > continuing
> > > > > their
> > > > > > > version numbering scheme from their previous origin.
> > > > > > > * Better communicates project's roots, and degree of maturity.
> > > > > > > * May be unexpected to some users.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd invite everyone to share their thoughts and preferences --
> > > names
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > important and well correlated with success. Thanks!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Davor
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] 

Re: First stable release: version designation?

[Davor Bonaci]

I don't think we have reached a consensus here yet. Let's re-examine this
after some time has passed.

If I understand everyone's opinion correctly, this is the summary:

Strongly for 2.0.0:
* Aljoscha
* Dan

Slight preference toward 2.0.0, but fine with 1.0.0:
* Davor

Strongly for 1.0.0: none.

Slight preference toward 1.0.0, but fine with 2.0.0:
* Amit
* Jesse
* JB
* Ted

Any additional opinions?

Thanks!

Davor

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Amit Sela  wrote:

> If we were to go with a 2.0 release, we would have to be very clear on
> maturity of different modules; for example python SDK is not as mature as
> Java SDK, some runners support streaming better than others, some run on
> YARN better than others, etc.
>
> My only reservation here is that the Apache community usually expects
> version 2.0 to be a mature products, so I'm OK as long as we do some
> "maturity-analysis" and document properly.
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:48 AM Ted Yu  wrote:
>
> > If we end up with version 2.0, more effort (trying out more use scenarios
> > e.g.) should go into release process to make sure what is released is
> > indeed stable.
> >
> > Normally people would have higher expectation on 2.0 release compared to
> > 1.0 release.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Davor Bonaci  wrote:
> >
> > > It sounds like we'll end up with two camps on this topic. This issue is
> > > probably best resolved with a vote, but I'll try to rephrase the
> question
> > > once to see whether a consensus is possible.
> > >
> > > Instead of asking which option is better, does anyone think the project
> > > would be negatively impacted if we were to decide on, in your opinion,
> > the
> > > less desirable variant? If so, can you comment on the negative impact
> of
> > > the less desirable alternative please?
> > >
> > > (I understand this may be pushing it a bit, but I think a possible
> > > consensus on this is worth it. Personally, I'll stay away from weighing
> > in
> > > on this topic.)
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Aljoscha Krettek 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I prefer 2.0.0 for the first stable release. It totally makes sense
> for
> > > > people coming from Dataflow 1.x and I can already envision the
> > confusion
> > > > between Beam 1.5 and Dataflow 1.5.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 at 07:42 Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Davor,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > For a Beam community perspective, 1.0.0 would make more sense. We
> > have
> > > a
> > > > > fair number of people starting with Beam (without knowing
> Dataflow).
> > > > >
> > > > > However, as Dataflow SDK (origins of Beam) was in 1.0.0, in order
> to
> > > > > avoid confusion with users coming to Beam from Dataflow, 2.0.0
> could
> > > > help.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a preference to 1.0.0 anyway, but I would understand
> starting
> > > > > from 2.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On 03/01/2017 07:56 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote:
> > > > > > The first stable release is our next major project-wide goal; see
> > > > > > discussion in [1]. I've been referring to it as "the first stable
> > > > > release"
> > > > > > for a long time, not "1.0.0" or "2.0.0" or "2017" or something
> > else,
> > > to
> > > > > > make sure we have an unbiased discussion and a consensus-based
> > > decision
> > > > > on
> > > > > > this matter.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that now is the time to consider the appropriate
> > designation
> > > > for
> > > > > > our first stable release, and formally make a decision on it. A
> > > > > reasonable
> > > > > > choices could be "1.0.0" or "2.0.0", perhaps there are others.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1.0.0:
> > > > > > * It logically comes after the current series, 0.x.y.
> > > > > > * Most people would expect it, I suppose.
> > > > > > * A possible confusion between Dataflow SDKs and Beam SDKs
> carrying
> > > the
> > > > > > same number.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2.0.0:
> > > > > > * Follows the pattern some other projects have taken --
> continuing
> > > > their
> > > > > > version numbering scheme from their previous origin.
> > > > > > * Better communicates project's roots, and degree of maturity.
> > > > > > * May be unexpected to some users.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd invite everyone to share their thoughts and preferences --
> > names
> > > > are
> > > > > > important and well correlated with success. Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Davor
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
> > > > c35067071aec9029d9100ae973c629
> > > > > > 9aa919c31d0de623ac367128e2@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > > > > jbono...@apache.org
> > > > > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > > > > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Process for getting the first stable release out

[Davor Bonaci]

We've been working on the first stable release for a while now -- we've
been tracking blocking issues [1], resolved many of them, organized a
hackathon [2], and improved testing coverage in various areas.

I think we are nearly done -- there are a few more blocking issues left in
JIRA, and probably a few more that we'll discover as we go along. That
said, I think it is time to discuss the process for getting this release
finalized.

I'd like to propose the following (tweaked) process for this special
release:

* Create a release branch, and start building release candidates *now*
This would accelerate branch creation compared to the normal process, but
would separate the first stable release from other development on the
master branch. This yields to stability and avoids unnecessary churn.

* Community-driven acceptance criteria
This would be an added step where everyone can recommend necessary
conditions for acceptance of the release candidate. Those conditions would
be *double-checked* manually, in addition to having all automated tests
pass. This could include important scenarios that we want to be really sure
about, e.g., WordCount example works on a given runner, TextIO can read
from HDFS, and we'd jointly validate those scenarios.

* Vote
As usual.

Time-wise, I think it would be really awesome to make this release coincide
with the ApacheCon conference that starts in about 2 weeks (on May 16th). I
think this would be a great goal -- and I'll do my part to make this
possible.

Finally, we haven't formally closed on the version designation (see
separate thread).

Thoughts? If there are no objections, I'll start this process soon, and we
can adjust as we go.

Thanks!

Davor

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%
3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22First%20stable%20release%22%20AND%
20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%
20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC
[2]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UKC2R_9FkSdMVTz2nt2sIW18KoLbIu6w0aj9bwSSPiw/

Re: Slack Invites

[Vladisav Jelisavcic]

Hi,

Apache Ignite [1] is using Gitter, and it seems to work really well.

Best regards,
Vladisav

[1] https://gitter.im/apacheignite/ignite

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Jason Kuster  wrote:

> Gitter does look like it solves many of the challenges we've been facing
> and looks like it's had wide adoption in some open-source communities. I
> haven't found any other official Apache projects using it, so we could be
> the vanguard here.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Eric Anderson 
> wrote:
>
> > While on the topic: Have we considered alternatives like Gitter
> > ? I'm not very familiar with Slack or Gitter, but
> Gitter
> > advertises being a little friendlier to open invites.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:38 AM Dan Halperin  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > My understanding is that if you use something like that plugin, and
> they
> > > detect it, Slack will ban you from new invites entirely or otherwise
> > punish
> > > you. They want this friction for free projects so that there's pressure
> > to
> > > pay.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Jesse Anderson <
> > je...@bigdatainstitute.io>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is possible to change how Slack invites are handled? This might
> > encourage
> > > > our community contributions.
> > > >
> > > > Right now, people have to email in (causing extra dev@/user@
> emails).
> > I
> > > > did
> > > > a quick search and found this  so
> > > > people
> > > > can invite themselves.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Jesse
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Jesse
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ---
> Jason Kuster
> Apache Beam / Google Cloud Dataflow
>

Re: Slack Invites

[Jason Kuster]

Gitter does look like it solves many of the challenges we've been facing
and looks like it's had wide adoption in some open-source communities. I
haven't found any other official Apache projects using it, so we could be
the vanguard here.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Eric Anderson 
wrote:

> While on the topic: Have we considered alternatives like Gitter
> ? I'm not very familiar with Slack or Gitter, but Gitter
> advertises being a little friendlier to open invites.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:38 AM Dan Halperin 
> wrote:
>
> > My understanding is that if you use something like that plugin, and they
> > detect it, Slack will ban you from new invites entirely or otherwise
> punish
> > you. They want this friction for free projects so that there's pressure
> to
> > pay.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Jesse Anderson <
> je...@bigdatainstitute.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Is possible to change how Slack invites are handled? This might
> encourage
> > > our community contributions.
> > >
> > > Right now, people have to email in (causing extra dev@/user@ emails).
> I
> > > did
> > > a quick search and found this  so
> > > people
> > > can invite themselves.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jesse
> > > --
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jesse
> > >
> >
>



-- 
---
Jason Kuster
Apache Beam / Google Cloud Dataflow

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[María García Herrero]

Wow! Congratulations, Davor!

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Ahmet Altay 
wrote:

> Congratulations, well deserved!
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andrew Psaltis 
> wrote:
>
> > Congrats Davor!
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Melissa Pashniak <
> > meliss...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations Davor!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert Bradshaw <
> > > rober...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Congratulations, Davor! Well deserved.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Hadar Hod  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Congrats, Davor!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Chamikara Jayalath <
> > > chamik...@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Congrats Davor. Very well deserved.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> - Cham
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 8:51 AM tarush grover <
> tarushappt...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Congrats Davor
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Regards,
> > > > >> > Tarush
> > > > >> > On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry <
> fran...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > Woohoo! So well deserved.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot <
> > > > echauc...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > > Congratulations Davor!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Well deserved indeed!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >> Congratulations!
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise <
> t...@apache.org
> > >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> Congrats!
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> > > > >> > > >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >>> Congrats!!
> > > > >> > >  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu <
> > > mingm...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > >  Congratulations @Davor!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela <
> > amitsel...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> Congratulations Davor!
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee <
> > > > lzljs3620...@aliyun.com
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > > Congratulations!
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > 
> > --
> > > > >> > > >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
> > > > >> > > >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> > > > >> > > >>> To:dev 
> > > > >> > > >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> > > > >> > > >>> Congrats!
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
> > > > >> > aljos...@apache.org
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >> Congrats! :-)
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles
> > > > >> >  > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >  wrote:
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > > Awesome!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu <
> > > > yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur <
> > > > >> > aviem...@gmail.com
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > > Congrats Davor! :)
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste
> > Onofré <
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > >  wrote:
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > >  Regards
> > > > >> > >  JB
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > > > >> > > > Hi all,
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > The ASF has just published a blog post[1]
> > welcoming
> > > > new
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >  members
> > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > >> > >  of
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > > the
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor
> Bonaci
> > > is
> > > > >> 

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Ahmet Altay]

Congratulations, well deserved!

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andrew Psaltis 
wrote:

> Congrats Davor!
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Melissa Pashniak <
> meliss...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations Davor!
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert Bradshaw <
> > rober...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations, Davor! Well deserved.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Hadar Hod 
> > > wrote:
> > > > Congrats, Davor!
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Chamikara Jayalath <
> > chamik...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Congrats Davor. Very well deserved.
> > > >>
> > > >> - Cham
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 8:51 AM tarush grover  >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Congrats Davor
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Regards,
> > > >> > Tarush
> > > >> > On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry 
> > > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Woohoo! So well deserved.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot <
> > > echauc...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > Congratulations Davor!
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Well deserved indeed!
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> Congratulations!
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise  >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> Congrats!
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> > > >> > > >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> Congrats!!
> > > >> > >  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu <
> > mingm...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > >  Congratulations @Davor!
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela <
> amitsel...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> Congratulations Davor!
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee <
> > > lzljs3620...@aliyun.com
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > > Congratulations!
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > 
> --
> > > >> > > >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
> > > >> > > >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> > > >> > > >>> To:dev 
> > > >> > > >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> > > >> > > >>> Congrats!
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
> > > >> > aljos...@apache.org
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> Congrats! :-)
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles
> > > >> >  > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >  wrote:
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > > Awesome!
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu <
> > > yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur <
> > > >> > aviem...@gmail.com
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > > Congrats Davor! :)
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste
> Onofré <
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > >  wrote:
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > >  Regards
> > > >> > >  JB
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > > >> > > > Hi all,
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > The ASF has just published a blog post[1]
> welcoming
> > > new
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >  members
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > >  of
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > > the
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci
> > is
> > > >> among
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >  them!
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your
> work
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >  for
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > >  the
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> Beam
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> > > >> > > >
> 

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Melissa Pashniak]

Congratulations Davor!


On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Robert Bradshaw <
rober...@google.com.invalid> wrote:

> Congratulations, Davor! Well deserved.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Hadar Hod 
> wrote:
> > Congrats, Davor!
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Chamikara Jayalath  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Congrats Davor. Very well deserved.
> >>
> >> - Cham
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 8:51 AM tarush grover 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Congrats Davor
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Tarush
> >> > On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Woohoo! So well deserved.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot <
> echauc...@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Congratulations Davor!
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Well deserved indeed!
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Congratulations!
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise 
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Congrats!
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> >> > > >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Congrats!!
> >> > >  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu 
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > 
> >> > >  Congratulations @Davor!
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela 
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Congratulations Davor!
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee <
> lzljs3620...@aliyun.com
> >> >
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> > > 
> >> > > > Congratulations!
> >> > > >>>
> >> > --
> >> > > >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
> >> > > >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> >> > > >>> To:dev 
> >> > > >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> >> > > >>> Congrats!
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
> >> > aljos...@apache.org
> >> > > 
> >> > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Congrats! :-)
> >> > > 
> >> > > > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles
> >> >  >> > > >
> >> > >  wrote:
> >> > > 
> >> > > > Awesome!
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu <
> yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > 
> >> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur <
> >> > aviem...@gmail.com
> >> > > >>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > 
> >> > > > Congrats Davor! :)
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >  wrote:
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> >> > > 
> >> > >  Regards
> >> > >  JB
> >> > > 
> >> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> >> > > > Hi all,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming
> new
> >> > > >
> >> > >  members
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >  of
> >> > > 
> >> > > > the
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is
> >> among
> >> > > >
> >> > >  them!
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
> >> > > >
> >> > >  for
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >  the
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Beam
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Best,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Jason
> >> > > >
> >> > > > [1]
> >> > https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> >> > > > tware-foundation-welcomes
> >> > > >
> >> > > > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't
> missing
> >> > any
> >> > > >
> >> > >  other
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Beam
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies
> and
> >> > > >
> >> > >  please
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >  recognize
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >  them on this or a new thread.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > >  Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >> > >  jbono...@apache.org
> >> > > 

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Robert Bradshaw]

Congratulations, Davor! Well deserved.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Hadar Hod  wrote:
> Congrats, Davor!
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Chamikara Jayalath 
> wrote:
>
>> Congrats Davor. Very well deserved.
>>
>> - Cham
>>
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 8:51 AM tarush grover 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Congrats Davor
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Tarush
>> > On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Woohoo! So well deserved.
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot 
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Congratulations Davor!
>> > > >
>> > > > Well deserved indeed!
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
>> > > >
>> > > >> Congratulations!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise 
>> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Congrats!
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
>> > > >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Congrats!!
>> > >  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu 
>> > wrote:
>> > > 
>> > >  Congratulations @Davor!
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela 
>> > wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Congratulations Davor!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee > >
>> > > >>>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > > Congratulations!
>> > > >>>
>> > --
>> > > >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
>> > > >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
>> > > >>> To:dev 
>> > > >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
>> > > >>> Congrats!
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
>> > aljos...@apache.org
>> > > 
>> > > >>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Congrats! :-)
>> > > 
>> > > > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles
>> > > > > >
>> > >  wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > > Awesome!
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
>> > > >>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur <
>> > aviem...@gmail.com
>> > > >>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > > Congrats Davor! :)
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > >>>
>> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
>> > > >>>
>> > >  wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
>> > > 
>> > >  Regards
>> > >  JB
>> > > 
>> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
>> > > > Hi all,
>> > > >
>> > > > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new
>> > > >
>> > >  members
>> > > >>>
>> > >  of
>> > > 
>> > > > the
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is
>> among
>> > > >
>> > >  them!
>> > > >
>> > > >> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
>> > > >
>> > >  for
>> > > >>>
>> > >  the
>> > > >
>> > > >> Beam
>> > > >>>
>> > >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
>> > > >
>> > > > Best,
>> > > >
>> > > > Jason
>> > > >
>> > > > [1]
>> > https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
>> > > > tware-foundation-welcomes
>> > > >
>> > > > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing
>> > any
>> > > >
>> > >  other
>> > > >
>> > > >> Beam
>> > > >>>
>> > >  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and
>> > > >
>> > >  please
>> > > >>>
>> > >  recognize
>> > > >>>
>> > >  them on this or a new thread.
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > >  Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> > >  jbono...@apache.org
>> > >  http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> > >  Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> > > 
>> > >  --
>> > > 
>> > > >>> Thanks,
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Jesse
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Hadar Hod]

Congrats, Davor!

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Chamikara Jayalath 
wrote:

> Congrats Davor. Very well deserved.
>
> - Cham
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 8:51 AM tarush grover 
> wrote:
>
> > Congrats Davor
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tarush
> > On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry  wrote:
> >
> > > Woohoo! So well deserved.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Congratulations Davor!
> > > >
> > > > Well deserved indeed!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
> > > >
> > > >> Congratulations!
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise 
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Congrats!
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> > > >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Congrats!!
> > >  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > >  Congratulations @Davor!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela 
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Congratulations Davor!
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee  >
> > > >>>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Congratulations!
> > > >>>
> > --
> > > >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
> > > >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> > > >>> To:dev 
> > > >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> > > >>> Congrats!
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
> > aljos...@apache.org
> > > 
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Congrats! :-)
> > > 
> > > > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles
> >  > > >
> > >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Awesome!
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
> > > >>
> > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur <
> > aviem...@gmail.com
> > > >>
> > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Congrats Davor! :)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > >>>
> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > >>>
> > >  wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> > > 
> > >  Regards
> > >  JB
> > > 
> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new
> > > >
> > >  members
> > > >>>
> > >  of
> > > 
> > > > the
> > > >>
> > > >>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is
> among
> > > >
> > >  them!
> > > >
> > > >> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
> > > >
> > >  for
> > > >>>
> > >  the
> > > >
> > > >> Beam
> > > >>>
> > >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Jason
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > > > tware-foundation-welcomes
> > > >
> > > > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing
> > any
> > > >
> > >  other
> > > >
> > > >> Beam
> > > >>>
> > >  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and
> > > >
> > >  please
> > > >>>
> > >  recognize
> > > >>>
> > >  them on this or a new thread.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > >  Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > >  jbono...@apache.org
> > >  http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > >  Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > > 
> > >  --
> > > 
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Jesse
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Slack Invites

[Eric Anderson]

While on the topic: Have we considered alternatives like Gitter
? I'm not very familiar with Slack or Gitter, but Gitter
advertises being a little friendlier to open invites.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:38 AM Dan Halperin 
wrote:

> My understanding is that if you use something like that plugin, and they
> detect it, Slack will ban you from new invites entirely or otherwise punish
> you. They want this friction for free projects so that there's pressure to
> pay.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Jesse Anderson 
> wrote:
>
> > Is possible to change how Slack invites are handled? This might encourage
> > our community contributions.
> >
> > Right now, people have to email in (causing extra dev@/user@ emails). I
> > did
> > a quick search and found this  so
> > people
> > can invite themselves.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jesse
> > --
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jesse
> >
>

Re: Slack Invites

[Dan Halperin]

My understanding is that if you use something like that plugin, and they
detect it, Slack will ban you from new invites entirely or otherwise punish
you. They want this friction for free projects so that there's pressure to
pay.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Jesse Anderson 
wrote:

> Is possible to change how Slack invites are handled? This might encourage
> our community contributions.
>
> Right now, people have to email in (causing extra dev@/user@ emails). I
> did
> a quick search and found this  so
> people
> can invite themselves.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jesse
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Jesse
>

Slack Invites

[Jesse Anderson]

Is possible to change how Slack invites are handled? This might encourage
our community contributions.

Right now, people have to email in (causing extra dev@/user@ emails). I did
a quick search and found this  so people
can invite themselves.

Thanks,

Jesse
-- 
Thanks,

Jesse

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Chamikara Jayalath]

Congrats Davor. Very well deserved.

- Cham

On Thu, May 4, 2017, 8:51 AM tarush grover  wrote:

> Congrats Davor
>
> Regards,
> Tarush
> On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry  wrote:
>
> > Woohoo! So well deserved.
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations Davor!
> > >
> > > Well deserved indeed!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
> > >
> > >> Congratulations!
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Congrats!
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> > >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Congrats!!
> >  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu 
> wrote:
> > 
> >  Congratulations @Davor!
> > >
> > >
> > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Congratulations Davor!
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee 
> > >>>
> > >> wrote:
> > 
> > > Congratulations!
> > >>>
> --
> > >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
> > >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> > >>> To:dev 
> > >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> > >>> Congrats!
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
> aljos...@apache.org
> > 
> > >>> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Congrats! :-)
> > 
> > > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles
>  > >
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > Awesome!
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
> > >>
> > > wrote:
> > 
> > > Congratulations, Davor!
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur <
> aviem...@gmail.com
> > >>
> > > wrote:
> > 
> > > Congrats Davor! :)
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > >>>
> > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > >>>
> >  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> > 
> >  Regards
> >  JB
> > 
> >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new
> > >
> >  members
> > >>>
> >  of
> > 
> > > the
> > >>
> > >>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among
> > >
> >  them!
> > >
> > >> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
> > >
> >  for
> > >>>
> >  the
> > >
> > >> Beam
> > >>>
> >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > [1]
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > > tware-foundation-welcomes
> > >
> > > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing
> any
> > >
> >  other
> > >
> > >> Beam
> > >>>
> >  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and
> > >
> >  please
> > >>>
> >  recognize
> > >>>
> >  them on this or a new thread.
> > >
> > > --
> >  Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >  jbono...@apache.org
> >  http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >  Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > 
> >  --
> > 
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>
> > >>> Jesse
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Neelesh Salian]

Congratulations Davor. Well deserved!

On May 4, 2017 12:30 AM, "Jason Kuster" 
wrote:

Hi all,

The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of the
Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the Beam
community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.

Best,

Jason

[1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
tware-foundation-welcomes

P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other Beam
community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please recognize
them on this or a new thread.

--
---
Jason Kuster
Apache Beam / Google Cloud Dataflow

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[tarush grover]

Congrats Davor

Regards,
Tarush
On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 8:54 PM, Frances Perry  wrote:

> Woohoo! So well deserved.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot 
> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations Davor!
> >
> > Well deserved indeed!
> >
> >
> >
> > Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
> >
> >> Congratulations!
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
> >>
> >> Congrats!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> >>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Congrats!!
>  On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu  wrote:
> 
>  Congratulations @Davor!
> >
> >
> > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela  wrote:
> >>
> >> Congratulations Davor!
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee 
> >>>
> >> wrote:
> 
> > Congratulations!
> >>> --
> >>> From:Jesse Anderson 
> >>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> >>> To:dev 
> >>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> >>> Congrats!
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek  
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >> Congrats! :-)
> 
> > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles  >
>  wrote:
> 
> > Awesome!
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
> >>
> > wrote:
> 
> > Congratulations, Davor!
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  >>
> > wrote:
> 
> > Congrats Davor! :)
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >>>
> >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> >>>
>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> 
>  Regards
>  JB
> 
>  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new
> >
>  members
> >>>
>  of
> 
> > the
> >>
> >>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among
> >
>  them!
> >
> >> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
> >
>  for
> >>>
>  the
> >
> >> Beam
> >>>
>  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > tware-foundation-welcomes
> >
> > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any
> >
>  other
> >
> >> Beam
> >>>
>  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and
> >
>  please
> >>>
>  recognize
> >>>
>  them on this or a new thread.
> >
> > --
>  Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>  jbono...@apache.org
>  http://blog.nanthrax.net
>  Talend - http://www.talend.com
> 
>  --
> 
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Jesse
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Frances Perry]

Woohoo! So well deserved.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Etienne Chauchot 
wrote:

> Congratulations Davor!
>
> Well deserved indeed!
>
>
>
> Le 04/05/2017 à 17:02, Thomas Groh a écrit :
>
>> Congratulations!
>>
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
>>
>> Congrats!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
>>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Congrats!!
 On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu  wrote:

 Congratulations @Davor!
>
>
> On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela  wrote:
>>
>> Congratulations Davor!
>>
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee 
>>>
>> wrote:

> Congratulations!
>>> --
>>> From:Jesse Anderson 
>>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
>>> To:dev 
>>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
>>> Congrats!
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek >> wrote:
>
>> Congrats! :-)

> On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles 
 wrote:

> Awesome!
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
>>
> wrote:

> Congratulations, Davor!
>>
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur >
> wrote:

> Congrats Davor! :)
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>>
>> j...@nanthrax.net>
>>>
 wrote:
>>>
>>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)

 Regards
 JB

 On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new
>
 members
>>>
 of

> the
>>
>>> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among
>
 them!
>
>> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
>
 for
>>>
 the
>
>> Beam
>>>
 community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> tware-foundation-welcomes
>
> P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any
>
 other
>
>> Beam
>>>
 community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and
>
 please
>>>
 recognize
>>>
 them on this or a new thread.
>
> --
 Jean-Baptiste Onofré
 jbono...@apache.org
 http://blog.nanthrax.net
 Talend - http://www.talend.com

 --

>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jesse
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Ismaël Mejía]

Congratulations Davor!
Your membership is really deserved, You really got the Apache spirit !

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Thomas Groh  wrote:
> Congratulations!
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise  wrote:
>
>> Congrats!
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
>> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > Congrats!!
>> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Congratulations @Davor!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela  wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Congratulations Davor!
>> > > >
>> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee 
>> > wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Congratulations!
>> > > >> --
>> > > >> From:Jesse Anderson 
>> > > >> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
>> > > >> To:dev 
>> > > >> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
>> > > >> Congrats!
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Congrats! :-)
>> > >  On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles > >
>> > > >>> wrote:
>> > > 
>> > >  Awesome!
>> > > 
>> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Congrats Davor! :)
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Regards
>> > > >>> JB
>> > > >>>
>> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
>> > >  Hi all,
>> > > 
>> > >  The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new
>> members
>> > of
>> > > > the
>> > >  Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among
>> > > them!
>> > >  Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
>> for
>> > > the
>> > > >> Beam
>> > >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
>> > > 
>> > >  Best,
>> > > 
>> > >  Jason
>> > > 
>> > >  [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
>> > >  tware-foundation-welcomes
>> > > 
>> > >  P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any
>> > > other
>> > > >> Beam
>> > >  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and
>> please
>> > > >> recognize
>> > >  them on this or a new thread.
>> > > 
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> --
>> > > >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> > > >>> jbono...@apache.org
>> > > >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> > > >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> --
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Jesse
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Thomas Groh]

Congratulations!

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Weise  wrote:

> Congrats!
>
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
> sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Congrats!!
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu  wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations @Davor!
> > >
> > >
> > > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Congratulations Davor!
> > > >
> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee 
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Congratulations!
> > > >> --
> > > >> From:Jesse Anderson 
> > > >> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> > > >> To:dev 
> > > >> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> > > >> Congrats!
> > > >>
> > > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek  >
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Congrats! :-)
> > >  On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles  >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > 
> > >  Awesome!
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Congratulations, Davor!
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  > > >>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Congrats Davor! :)
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards
> > > >>> JB
> > > >>>
> > >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > >  Hi all,
> > > 
> > >  The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new
> members
> > of
> > > > the
> > >  Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among
> > > them!
> > >  Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work
> for
> > > the
> > > >> Beam
> > >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> > > 
> > >  Best,
> > > 
> > >  Jason
> > > 
> > >  [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > >  tware-foundation-welcomes
> > > 
> > >  P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any
> > > other
> > > >> Beam
> > >  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and
> please
> > > >> recognize
> > >  them on this or a new thread.
> > > 
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > > >>> jbono...@apache.org
> > > >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > > >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >> Jesse
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Thomas Weise]

Congrats!


On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Sourabh Bajaj <
sourabhba...@google.com.invalid> wrote:

> Congrats!!
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu  wrote:
>
> > Congratulations @Davor!
> >
> >
> > > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela  wrote:
> > >
> > > Congratulations Davor!
> > >
> > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Congratulations!
> > >> --
> > >> From:Jesse Anderson 
> > >> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> > >> To:dev 
> > >> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> > >> Congrats!
> > >>
> > >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Congrats! :-)
> >  On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles 
> > >>> wrote:
> > 
> >  Awesome!
> > 
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Congratulations, Davor!
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  > >>> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Congrats Davor! :)
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>> JB
> > >>>
> >  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> >  Hi all,
> > 
> >  The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members
> of
> > > the
> >  Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among
> > them!
> >  Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for
> > the
> > >> Beam
> >  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> > 
> >  Best,
> > 
> >  Jason
> > 
> >  [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> >  tware-foundation-welcomes
> > 
> >  P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any
> > other
> > >> Beam
> >  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please
> > >> recognize
> >  them on this or a new thread.
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > >>> jbono...@apache.org
> > >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Jesse
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Sourabh Bajaj]

Congrats!!
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:48 AM Mingmin Xu  wrote:

> Congratulations @Davor!
>
>
> > On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela  wrote:
> >
> > Congratulations Davor!
> >
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee  wrote:
> >>
> >> Congratulations!
> >> --
> >> From:Jesse Anderson 
> >> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
> >> To:dev 
> >> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
> >> Congrats!
> >>
> >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Congrats! :-)
>  On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles 
> >>> wrote:
> 
>  Awesome!
> 
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> > Congratulations, Davor!
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  >>> wrote:
> >
> >> Congrats Davor! :)
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> >> j...@nanthrax.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
>  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
>  Hi all,
> 
>  The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of
> > the
>  Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among
> them!
>  Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for
> the
> >> Beam
>  community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> 
>  Best,
> 
>  Jason
> 
>  [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
>  tware-foundation-welcomes
> 
>  P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any
> other
> >> Beam
>  community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please
> >> recognize
>  them on this or a new thread.
> 
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >>> jbono...@apache.org
> >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >>>
> >>> --
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Jesse
> >>
> >>
>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Mingmin Xu]

Congratulations @Davor!


> On May 4, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Amit Sela  wrote:
> 
> Congratulations Davor!
> 
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 10:02 JingsongLee  wrote:
>> 
>> Congratulations!
>> --
>> From:Jesse Anderson 
>> Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
>> To:dev 
>> Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
>> Congrats!
>> 
>>> On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Congrats! :-)
 On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles 
>>> wrote:
 
 Awesome!
 
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> 
> Congratulations, Davor!
> 
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur >> wrote:
> 
>> Congrats Davor! :)
>> 
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> j...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> 
 On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of
> the
 Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
 Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the
>> Beam
 community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
 
 Best,
 
 Jason
 
 [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
 tware-foundation-welcomes
 
 P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other
>> Beam
 community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please
>> recognize
 them on this or a new thread.
 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbono...@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>> 
>> 
> 
>>> 
>>> --
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Jesse
>> 
>> 

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[JingsongLee]

Congratulations!
--
From:Jesse Anderson 
Time:2017 May 4 (Thu) 21:36
To:dev 
Subject:Re: Congratulations Davor!
Congrats!

On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek  wrote:

> Congrats! :-)
> > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles 
> wrote:
> >
> > Awesome!
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> >> Congratulations, Davor!
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Congrats Davor! :)
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> 
>  Regards
>  JB
> 
>  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of
> >> the
> > Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
> > Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the
> >>> Beam
> > community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > tware-foundation-welcomes
> >
> > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other
> >>> Beam
> > community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please
> >>> recognize
> > them on this or a new thread.
> >
> 
>  --
>  Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>  jbono...@apache.org
>  http://blog.nanthrax.net
>  Talend - http://www.talend.com
> 
> >>>
> >>
>
> --
Thanks,

Jesse

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Jesse Anderson]

Congrats!

On Thu, May 4, 2017, 6:20 AM Aljoscha Krettek  wrote:

> Congrats! :-)
> > On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles 
> wrote:
> >
> > Awesome!
> >
> > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> >
> >> Congratulations, Davor!
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Congrats Davor! :)
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> 
>  Regards
>  JB
> 
>  On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of
> >> the
> > Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
> > Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the
> >>> Beam
> > community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > tware-foundation-welcomes
> >
> > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other
> >>> Beam
> > community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please
> >>> recognize
> > them on this or a new thread.
> >
> 
>  --
>  Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>  jbono...@apache.org
>  http://blog.nanthrax.net
>  Talend - http://www.talend.com
> 
> >>>
> >>
>
> --
Thanks,

Jesse

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Aljoscha Krettek]

Congrats! :-)
> On 4. May 2017, at 14:34, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:
> 
> Awesome!
> 
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Ted Yu  wrote:
> 
>> Congratulations, Davor!
>> 
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  wrote:
>> 
>>> Congrats Davor! :)
>>> 
>>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
 
 Regards
 JB
 
 On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of
>> the
> Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
> Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the
>>> Beam
> community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Jason
> 
> [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> tware-foundation-welcomes
> 
> P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other
>>> Beam
> community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please
>>> recognize
> them on this or a new thread.
> 
 
 --
 Jean-Baptiste Onofré
 jbono...@apache.org
 http://blog.nanthrax.net
 Talend - http://www.talend.com
 
>>> 
>> 

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Ted Yu]

Congratulations, Davor!

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Aviem Zur  wrote:

> Congrats Davor! :)
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
> > Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of the
> > > Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
> > > Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the
> Beam
> > > community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > > tware-foundation-welcomes
> > >
> > > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other
> Beam
> > > community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please
> recognize
> > > them on this or a new thread.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbono...@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>

Jenkins build is back to stable : beam_Release_NightlySnapshot #404

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Aviem Zur]

Congrats Davor! :)

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> Congrats ! Well deserved ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of the
> > Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
> > Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the Beam
> > community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
> > tware-foundation-welcomes
> >
> > P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other Beam
> > community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please recognize
> > them on this or a new thread.
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: Congratulations Davor!

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Congrats ! Well deserved ;)

Regards
JB

On 05/04/2017 09:30 AM, Jason Kuster wrote:

Hi all,

The ASF has just published a blog post[1] welcoming new members of the
Apache Software Foundation, and our own Davor Bonaci is among them!
Congratulations and thank you to Davor for all of your work for the Beam
community, and the ASF at large. Well deserved.

Best,

Jason

[1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the-apache-sof
tware-foundation-welcomes

P.S. I dug through the list to make sure I wasn't missing any other Beam
community members; if I have, my sincerest apologies and please recognize
them on this or a new thread.



--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com