Great !
I'm starting the Jira triage ;)
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 23/01/2018 19:51, Reuven Lax wrote:
Sounds good. Also many things that are currently flagged as 2.3.0 don't
appear to be actual release blockers to me.
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 1:39 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
lease blockers to me.
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 1:39 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
Hi guys,
Some days ago, I proposed to start Beam 2.3.0 around January 26th.
So, we are
few days from this date.
As a best effort, can you please in Jira flag the
Awesome !
Ready to review if you want !
Regards
JB
On 23/01/2018 20:48, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
Regarding Java 8, I'm about to send a large mechanical PR converting a
lot of code to use lambdas and better type inference.
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:37 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
will keep you posted.
Sorry about that.
Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
otes I'll share the calendar publicly and I'll give access
> to
> the other folks.
>
> Thanks,
> G
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Hi guys,
Kenn and I are doing the latest triage. I'm creating some PRs that would be good
for 2.3.0 (but not blocker).
As discussed, I plan to start the release process tomorrow evening (my time).
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 01/23/2018 10:39 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
Team work ! ;)
Thanks Reuven !
Regards
JB
On 25/01/2018 21:08, Reuven Lax wrote:
Thank you for running this JB!
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
Hi guys,
Kenn and I are doing the latest triage. I'm creating
his release as other projects do.
>
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 9:08 PM, Reuven Lax wrote:
>> Thank you for running this JB!
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> Kenn and I a
lease should block on it.
>
> Reuven
>
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
> I disagree: the CassandraIO issues are not blocker as they are not
> regression.
>
> In order to insure the rel
t; solid suite of ValidatesRunner tests (I don't have a Samza deployment handy to
> test non-local).
>
> Given all this, I am ready to put it on a feature branch where it can mature
> further, and we can build out our CI for it, etc, until we agree it is ready
> for
> master
o the community for closing about 30 PRs
> in
> the past couple of days for the 2.3.0 release.
>
>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
use it.
I'm waiting a little more before cutting the release (especially for BEAM-3392
and BEAM-3087). However, I would like to cut the release asap.
Thanks,
Regards
JB
On 01/23/2018 10:39 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Some days ago, I proposed to start Beam 2.3
lready reviewing the PR form BEAM-793.
>
> Reuven
>
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 4:00 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> we still have 7 Jira targeted to 2.3.0.
>
> For most of them, Ismaël and I are
Hi,
it's not yet done. Let me do a PR to test that.
Regards
JB
On 01/28/2018 09:50 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi guys
>
> Out if curiosity, can -parameters (javac) be part of the 2.3 if not already?
>
> Le 27 janv. 2018 18:39, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <m
By the way, I created BEAM-3551 for the tracking.
I will work on it today.
Regards
JB
On 01/28/2018 09:50 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Hi guys
>
> Out if curiosity, can -parameters (javac) be part of the 2.3 if not already?
>
> Le 27 janv. 2018 18:39, "Jean-Baptist
OK, thanks. I keep you posted ;)
Regards
JB
On 28/01/2018 15:06, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
Will be online this afternoon. Ping me if you need help.
Le 28 janv. 2018 11:36, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> a écrit :
By the way, I created BEAM-35
pe to have feedbacks soon.
Anyway, these Jiras are not release blocker, so I will start the release
process tomorrow morning my time.
By the way, I created 2.4.0 version in Jira.
Thanks all for your help and support !
Regards
JB
On 27/01/2018 13:00, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi guys,
we
more detail about evolving schemas in long-running streaming
> pipelines.
>
> Please take a look. I think this will be very valuable to Beam, and welcome
> any
> feedback.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tnG2DPHZYbsomvihIpXruUmQ12pHGK0QIvXS1FOTgRc/edit#
>
> Reuven
Hi,
As BEAM-793 and BEAM-3551 are not release blocker, if I don't have update in the
PRs in the coming couple of hours, I will bump these Jiras to 2.4.0 and start
the release process.
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 01/28/2018 08:29 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> a ne
has been created this morning and targeted
to 2.3.0. I asked for detail in the Jira and no update yet. Can I have an update
on this one ? Else I will bump it to 2.4.0.
I will cut the 2.3.0 release tonight my time then.
Thanks,
Regards
JB
On 01/29/2018 07:14 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
a bit similar to the format used by Gris for
> the newsletter. Actually if we have paced releases probably we can mix
> both the release notes and the newsletter into one, no ?
>
> What do you think? Other ideas/disagreement/etc.
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
age issues, possibly pinging the author or reviewer. I'm
>> -1 on lowering the bar of code that goes in; I think we can maintain a
>> high bar in a welcoming atmosphere (and I find code review can be a
>> good mentoring opportunity as well). High quality reviews take t
Awesome, thanks Ahmet !
It's what I thought, but wanted to have team agreement ;)
Regards
JB
On 01/29/2018 06:19 PM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> I moved BEAM-3559 out of 2.3.0, it is not targeted for this release.
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:
eading the blog and getting
> folks interested in what’s going on and such.
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>> On Jan 29, 2018, at 9:02 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ismaël
>>
>> The idea is good, but the post should be pretty short. Let me explain:
>&g
We are now ready for the release. I'm starting the process.
Thanks again for your help and support !
Regards
JB
On 01/29/2018 02:22 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi,
>
> new update (and I hope the last one ;)):
>
> - BEAM-3551 has been reviewed and merged. This Jir
any pain points in the process, and steps we can
> automate. Can you keep a rough log of issues you run into?
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
> We are now ready for the release. I'm starting the pr
Good point Kenn. I will do the list of what we need to do a release with gradle.
Regards
JB
On 01/29/2018 07:31 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> I'd also love if we can use the notes to keep track of what needs to be done
> for
> Gradle.
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:29 AM,
/orgapachebeam-1026/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.3.0-RC1
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/381
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
fleshed out now (again thanks to feedback from community
> members),
> and the
> > document talks in more detail about evolving schemas in
> long-running streaming
> > pipelines.
> >
> > Please ta
e in Spark runner, or even specific optimization like persist. I had lot
of questions from Spark users saying: "in my Spark job, I know where and how I
should use persist (rdd.persist()), but I can't do such optimization using
Beam". So it could be a good improvements.
Tho
Thanks Kenn for the reminder ! Very useful
Regards
JB
On 30/01/2018 17:33, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
Hi all,
In the history I see merge commits like:
"Merge pull request #12345 from some_user/random-branch-name"
This is GitHub's default, but it is quite silly. The branch name is not
infor
Hi Dan,
good catch !!!
I think it makes sense to have a predictable order. It's worth to do it,
because even if we don't detect some tests failures, I think it would be
mostly the test itself (like missing resources cleanup or so), not that
the test is covering itself.
+1 on the proposal.
18 at 2:21 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
Hi,
As part of the discussion about schema, Romain mentioned hint. I
think it's
worth to have an explanation about that and especially it could be
wider than
schema.
Today, to give i
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
<https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau&
orm's output PCollections. This is nearly as easy to use
however, as we can implement a helper PTransform that can be used to set
hints. I.e.
pc.apply(AddHints.of(hint1, hint2, hint3))
Is no harder than called pc.addHint()
Reuven
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
lly be metadata in the pcollection,
just like coder and schema.
On Jan 30, 2018 11:57 AM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
Great idea for AddHints.of() !
What would be the resulting PCollection ? Just a PCollection of
hi
s would logically be metadata in the pcollection, just
like coder and schema.
On Jan 30, 2018 11:57 AM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" wrote:
Great idea for AddHints.of() !
What would be the resulting PCollection ? Just a PCollection of hints or
the pc elements + hints ?
Regards
JB
On 30/01/201
..@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Not sure how it fits in terms of API yet but +1 for the high level view.
> Makes perfect sense.
>
> Le 30 janv. 2018 21:41, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> a écrit :
>
> Hi
avoid potential misuse for portability and to limit extra
> knobs, Also to avoid the risky case of ending up with some sort of
> runtime ‘map-like’ configuration with hundreds of options that change
> behavior like they exist in Hadoop and Spark, We should avoid adding
> another l
coverage and then
>> to delayed, bad and broken releases.
>>
>> +1 on converting Google docs to either markdown or including them on the
>> website since it is a valuable resource and becomes indexed via search
>> engines.
>>
>> I don't have a strong
Hi Reuven,
it's also what I did in JdbcIO for the statement or column mapper.
That's fair enough.
Regards
JB
On 01/31/2018 01:35 PM, Reuven Lax wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
>
nnibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
By the way, short term: ParquetIO, RabbitMqIO are coming (PRs already open).
Regards
JB
On 01/31/2018 02:41 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi Romain,
>
> I have some IOs locally and some idea:
>
> - ExecIO (it has been proposed as PR but declined)
> - ConsoleIO (gen
u
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau>
>
> 201
+1 (binding)
Casting my own +1 ;)
Regards
JB
On 01/30/2018 09:04 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 2.3.0, as
> follows:
>
> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> [ ] -1, Do not approve the re
to perform a manual validation task, please sign up so multiple
> people don't waste effort.
>
> Alan & JB, as far as your pairing up to automate more, anything manual on this
> sheet should be considered.
>
> Kenn
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:59 AM, Jean-Baptiste O
Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
metadata on the PCollection (though something
interpreted by the model, where hints are interpreted by the runner)
Reuven
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:37 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
Hi,
I think we should avoid to mix two things in the discussion
d.
[BEAM-3584] Java dataflow job fails with 2.3.0 RC1, due to missing
worker image
[BEAM-3585] Python dataflow job fails with 2.3.0 RC1, due to missing
worker image
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
Thanks Kenn,
I prep
alidate Dataflow
so far, as worker images are not yet built. Hopefully they'll be built
soon, and we'll be able to validate.
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
Hi Alan
does it related to change in the codebase or
of Apache
>> Beam) otherwise we negate any space savings.
>>
>> If we either use a common relocation scheme or a
>> dependencies jar then each relocation should specifically
>> contain the
tains
concrete votes.
5. The vote duration can be extended on request.
So, I'm extending this vote to 72 more hours to give us time to review
especially the dataflow worker images test and the Flink TextIO potential issue.
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 01/30/2018 09:04 AM, Jean-Baptiste On
rsion of the
> Flink Cluster. And I think comparing the suffix of your flink-runner
> dependency and the suffix of your Flink dist is an easy way of doing that.
>
>
>> On 31. Jan 2018, at 16:55, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>
>> Hi Romain,
>>
>> AFAIR o
s="--runner=DirectRunner --suite=SMOKE
> --streaming=true --manageResources=false --monitorJobs=true
> --enforceEncodability=true --enforceImmutability=true" -pl
> 'sdks/java/nexmark'
>
> I think 2 and 3 deserve to be fixed or at least evaluated as important
> enough t
hat there is already a fix for that:
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/4558/files
>
> And BEAM-3587 also seems serious enough, IMHO.
>
> Btw, BEAM-3186, which seems quite serious, was also finally figured out.
>
> Best,
> Aljoscha
>
>> On 1. Feb 2018, at 16:0
Hi guys,
Especially due to BEAM-3587 & BEAM-3186 regressions, I cancel RC1.
We will cherry-pick fixes on release-2.3.0 branch.
I'm updating Jira right now. When the fixes will be cherry-picked, I will submit
a RC2 to vote.
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 01/30/2018 09:04 AM, Jean-Baptiste Ono
.
>
> What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make this a
> deal-breaker?
>
> Kenn
>
> [1]
> e.g.
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenablefuture-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
> and such discussions are likely
(guess it will be one of the first to be
> asked)
> for instance.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau&g
e
> output - most of the codecs - then we need to
> change
> the way it works to something like that which does
> it for the user which doesn't know its coder got
> wrapped.
>
> Hope it makes sense, if not, don't hesitate to ask
> questions.
>
> Happy end of week-end.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |
> Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old
> Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
forgotten when we do Beam 3.0,
> then we're stuck waiting around till Beam 4.0.
>
> Reuven
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
> That's a good point. In the roadmap for Beam 3, I think it makes s
t;
> a écrit :
>
> Seems fine to me. At some point we might want to do an audit of existing
> Jira issues, because I suspect there are issues that should be targeted to
> 3.0 but are not yet tagged.
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 11:41 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
n the direct runner performance change.
The goal is to cut RC2 tomorrow or the day after.
Regards
JB
On 02/01/2018 04:16 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Especially due to BEAM-3587 & BEAM-3186 regressions, I cancel RC1.
>
> We will cherry-pick fixes on releas
rg/jira/browse/BEAM-3589
>
> @JB I didn't yet merge them on the 2.3.0 branch, though, but I can or you can
> go
> ahead.
>
>> On 5. Feb 2018, at 06:30, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> Quic
://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3589>
> >
> > @JB I didn't yet merge them on the 2.3.0 branch, though, but I can or
> you can go
> > ahead.
> >
> >> On 5. Feb 2018, at 06:30, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>
&
Created:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3617
Regards
JB
On 02/05/2018 04:42 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> What is the Jira for direct runner perf?
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:35 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
> Thanks !
&
nnectors so issues can be routed effectively.
> Connectors with no owner will likely rot and we'll need a plan for what to do
> when that happens.
>
> Kenn
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
; hearing
> > from folks on other ASF project what they have done.
> >
> > It also raises another issue, which is that I think we would benefit
> from
> > granular Jira components for connectors so issues can be routed
> effectively.
> >
l keep you posted.
Regards
JB
On 02/05/2018 04:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Created:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3617
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 02/05/2018 04:42 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>> What is the Jira for direct runner perf?
&g
Feb 5, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
> Created:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3617
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3617>
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 02/0
ke to cut RC2 later tonight or tomorrow morning (my
time).
Thoughts ?
Regards
JB
On 02/06/2018 09:42 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi Reuven,
>
> it's what I'm suspecting. git bisect should give us more information (still in
> progress, 3 more steps to complete ;)). I ke
> Runner
> API, we do that.
>
> 3. We leave as it is, adding a note that direct runner
> has worse performance in
> 2.3.0 compared to 2.2.0.
>
> In any ca
/orgapachebeam-1027/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.3.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/381
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
d for RC1 were
> fixed.
> Run Nexmark on Direct/Flink runner on local mode, no
> regressions now.
> Installed python version on virtualenv and run
> wordcount
> with succ
licts
> between runners/io or even 2 ios so it shouldnt block a release by itself
> until beam aims to solve properly conflicts - which means without shading
> which breaks the io ecosystem on the user side.
>
> Just my 2cts
>
> Le 9 févr. 2018 06:07, "
://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3519
On 02/08/2018 06:37 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 2.3.0, as
> follows:
>
> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (pl
e the situation.
Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
ance>
>
> 2018-02-09 12:00 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek <mailto:aljos...@apache.org>>:
>
> Yes, I was just about to write about this as well. In my recent PRs this
> always failed for different reasons.
>
> Thanks for looking into this!
>
2/10/2018 02:11 AM, Chamikara Jayalath wrote:
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/4651 is in review.
>
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 1:38 PM Reuven Lax <mailto:re...@google.com>> wrote:
>
> Late to respond, but +1 to this decision.
>
> On Fri, Feb 9
ater then.
>
> Etienne
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
/orgapachebeam-1028/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.3.0-RC3
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/381
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
ni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
w.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
> 2018-02-12 17:15 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>>:
>
> Hi Neville,
>
> Let me take a look on the profile used for the release:perform.
>
> I'll kee
Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/>> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com>> | Github
> >
g
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee
st publish this artifact to avoid creating a new
> RC+vote..
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
> > But that's it: deploy skip is set to the module, so it's expected.
> >
>
t;
> bq. is OK with staging repo extension ?
>
> +1 on using the above approach.
>
> Cheers
>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
au> | Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Hi guys,
as discussed, I created a staging repository extension containing the
hadoop-input-format artifact:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1029/
Regards
JB
On 02/11/2018 06:33 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review and vo
Gently reminder for the vote, we have only +1 (non binding) vote for now.
Regards
JB
On 02/11/2018 06:33 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for the version 2.3.0, as
> follows:
>
> [ ] +1, Approve the releas
+1 (binding)
Tested the Spark runner (with wordcount example and beam samples)
Tested the performance of the direct runner
I just updated the spreadsheet.
Regards
JB
On 02/11/2018 06:33 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candida
ableByteChannel) ?
Thanks !
Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm working on the Apache Beam ParquetIO:
>
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1851
> <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1851>
ransform,
> which
> could group the data back.
>
> I can try to hack a custom source for our use case, but thought I'll shoot you
> guys a note (wiki says I should :-)
>
> Let me know if you guys have thoughts, and apologize for what might be a super
> noob question
Hi all,
I inform you that the travel assistance applications
(http://www.apache.org/travel/) are now open.
If you plan to attend to ApacheCon, but we can't for financial reason, you can
apply to the program.
Lot of committers, PMC members and members will be present, so it's a great
opportunity
27;d like to give the author some time to update.
>
> rb
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:20 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ryan,
>>
>> Thanks for the update.
>>
>> Ideally for Beam, it would be great to have the AvroParquetReader and
>
>>>>>
> >>>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Validated SHAs + tag vs source.zip file.
> >>>>> Run mvn clean install -Prelease OK
> >>>>> Validated that the 3 r
Great !!!
Thanks for the update, I will close the vote then.
Regards
JB
On 02/15/2018 11:45 PM, Ben Sidhom wrote:
> I just successfully ran the quickstart on Flink 1.4.0 on Dataproc. Should be
> good to go.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:21 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <mailto
Hi Romain
Is it not @FinishBundle your solution ?
Regards
JB
Le 16 févr. 2018 à 17:06, à 17:06, Romain Manni-Bucau a
écrit:
>I see Reuven, so it is actually a broken contract for end users more
>than a
>bug. Concretely a user must have a way to execute code once the
>teardown is
>no more used
Hi all,
I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this release.
There are 9 approving votes, 6 of which are binding:
* Jean-Baptiste Onofré
* Ismaël Mejia
* Lukasz Cwik
* Reuven Lax
* Ahmet Altay
* Robert Bradshaw
There are no disapproving votes.
Thanks everyone!
Regards
J
Hi,
Can someone from Python grand me permission to upload Python SDK 2.3.0 to PyPi ?
My user is jbonofre.
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 02/16/2018 03:40 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Great !!!
>
> Thanks for the update, I will close the vote then.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
201 - 300 of 1118 matches
Mail list logo
