Awesome!
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Ahmet Altay
wrote:
> Thank you Prabeesh and Sergio for fixing those!
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 4:51 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
>
> > Awesome, thanks Sergio ! Much appreciated ;)
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >
> > On 01/31/2017 01:42 PM, Sergio
Thank you Prabeesh and Sergio for fixing those!
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 4:51 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> Awesome, thanks Sergio ! Much appreciated ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 01/31/2017 01:42 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:
>
>> PR #1879 provides the basics: https://github.com/apache/beam/pul
Awesome, thanks Sergio ! Much appreciated ;)
Regards
JB
On 01/31/2017 01:42 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:
PR #1879 provides the basics: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1879
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
No, that's fine as soon as we clearly document the prer
PR #1879 provides the basics: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1879
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> No, that's fine as soon as we clearly document the prerequisite for the
> build. IMHO, we should provide quick BUILDING instructions in the README.md.
>
> Regards
No, that's fine as soon as we clearly document the prerequisite for the
build. IMHO, we should provide quick BUILDING instructions in the README.md.
Regards
JB
On 01/31/2017 01:24 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote:
Originally we integrate the build in Maven with the default profile.
Do you feel like
Originally we integrate the build in Maven with the default profile.
Do you feel like it'd be better to have it under a separated profile or so?
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> Just to be clear, the prerequisite to be able to build the Python SDK are:
>
> apt-get
Just to be clear, the prerequisite to be able to build the Python SDK are:
apt-get install python-setuptools
apt-get install python-pip
It's also required by the default "regular" build.
Regards
JB
On 01/31/2017 11:02 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Just one thing I noticed (and can be helpfu
Just one thing I noticed (and can be helpful for others): to build Beam
we now need python setuptools installed.
For instance, on Ubuntu, you have to do:
apt-get install python-setuptools
Same for the pip distribution.
I guess (if not already done), we have to update README/Building
instruct
Awesome !
Great work guys !
Regards
JB
On 01/31/2017 08:10 AM, Ahmet Altay wrote:
Hi all,
This merge is completed. Python SDK is now officially part of the master
branch! Thank you all for the support. Please open an issue, if you notice
a reference to the now obsolete python-sdk branch in th
great!
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Ahmet Altay
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This merge is completed. Python SDK is now officially part of the master
> branch! Thank you all for the support. Please open an issue, if you notice
> a reference to the now obsolete python-sdk branch in the documentation.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1360
On 31 January 2017 at 12:12, Prabeesh K. wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BAHIR-86
>
> On 31 January 2017 at 11:10, Ahmet Altay wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This merge is completed. Python SDK is now officially part of the master
>> bra
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BAHIR-86
On 31 January 2017 at 11:10, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This merge is completed. Python SDK is now officially part of the master
> branch! Thank you all for the support. Please open an issue, if you notice
> a reference to the now obsolete pyt
Great -- congratulations to everyone who has contributed to the Python SDK!
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Ahmet Altay
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This merge is completed. Python SDK is now officially part of the master
> branch! Thank you all for the support. Please open an issue, if you notice
> a
Hi all,
This merge is completed. Python SDK is now officially part of the master
branch! Thank you all for the support. Please open an issue, if you notice
a reference to the now obsolete python-sdk branch in the documentation.
There will not be any more merges to the python-sdk branch. Going for
To clarify the implied criteria of that last exchange, it is "An SDK should
have at least one runner that can execute the complete model (may be a
direct runner)"
I want to highlight this, because whether an _SDK_ supports unbounded data
is not particularly well-defined, and will evolve:
- With
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Dan Halperin
wrote:
> I do not think that Python SDK yet meets the bar [1] for implementing the
> Beam model -- supporting Unbounded data is very important. That said, given
> the committed and sustained set of contributors, it generally makes sense
> to me to mak
Thank you Dan. Adding support for unbounded data is on the roadmap and it
will be added to Python SDK soon.
Thank you all again, I will start the official voting thread.
Thank you,
Ahmet
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Dan Halperin
wrote:
> I do not think that Python SDK yet meets the bar [1
I do not think that Python SDK yet meets the bar [1] for implementing the
Beam model -- supporting Unbounded data is very important. That said, given
the committed and sustained set of contributors, it generally makes sense
to me to make an exception in anticipation of these features being fleshed
Thank you all for the comments so far. I would follow the process as
suggested by Davor and others in this thread.
Ahmet
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Sergio Fernández
wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Ahmet Altay
> wrote:
> >
> > tl;dr: I would like to start a discussion ab
Hi
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Ahmet Altay
wrote:
>
> tl;dr: I would like to start a discussion about merging python-sdk branch
> to master branch. Python SDK is mature enough and merging it to master will
> accelerate its development and adoption.
>
Good point, Ahmet!
I've following close
+1 merged after 0.5.
It's on a great trajectory in terms of development and community.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Kenneth Knowles
wrote:
> Seems reasonable, and the timeline Davor suggests makes a lot of sense.
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Lukasz Cwik
> wrote:
>
> > I'm also for
Seems reasonable, and the timeline Davor suggests makes a lot of sense.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Lukasz Cwik
wrote:
> I'm also for merging to master.
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
>
> > It makes sense to merge after 0.5.0 release.
> >
> > Good point
I'm also for merging to master.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> It makes sense to merge after 0.5.0 release.
>
> Good point Davor: +1
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 01/17/2017 03:34 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote:
>
>> +1. I think merging to master would be an awesome next step
It makes sense to merge after 0.5.0 release.
Good point Davor: +1
Regards
JB
On 01/17/2017 03:34 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote:
+1. I think merging to master would be an awesome next step for the Python
SDK.
And, thanks for a great summary of the current state, roadmap, and impact
to the project as
+1. I think merging to master would be an awesome next step for the Python
SDK.
And, thanks for a great summary of the current state, roadmap, and impact
to the project as a whole -- awesome!
Process-wise, I'd suggest starting a formal vote once this discussion seems
to be trending towards a conc
Hi
I didn't try the Python SDK recently but you provided a clear "state of the
art". Anyway I'm in favor of merging things as quick as possible (assuming it's
in a good shape in term of build, test, ...): it would potentially grow up the
"external" contributions.
So +1 from my side.
Regards
J
Hi all,
tl;dr: I would like to start a discussion about merging python-sdk branch
to master branch. Python SDK is mature enough and merging it to master will
accelerate its development and adoption.
With a great effort from a lot of contributors(*), Python SDK [1] is now a
mostly complete, tested
27 matches
Mail list logo
