Hi all,
Thanks a lot for the discussion. As all the people tend to option #1, we will
take option#1 as the solution for this issue. Thanks again!
Thanks,
Dian
> 在 2019年10月30日，上午9:58，Hequn Cheng 写道：
>
> Hi Dian,
>
> Thanks a lot for bringing the discussion.
> It would be a headache to address
Hi Dian,
Thanks a lot for bringing the discussion.
It would be a headache to address these environmental problems, so +1 for
option #1 to use the virtual environment.
Best, Hequn
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 9:31 PM Till Rohrmann wrote:
> Thanks for bringing this topic up Dian. I'd be in favour of
Thanks for bringing this topic up Dian. I'd be in favour of option #1
because this would also allow to create reproducible builds.
Cheers,
Till
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:28 AM jincheng sun
wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for bringing up the discussion Dian.
> +1 for the #1.
>
> Hi Jeff, this changes is f
Hi,
Thanks for bringing up the discussion Dian.
+1 for the #1.
Hi Jeff, this changes is for the PyFlink release, i.e.,The release manager
should build the release package for Pyflink, and prepare the python
environment during the building. Since 1.10 we only support python 3.5+, so
it will throw a
I am a little confused, why we need to prepare python environment in
release. Shouldn't that be done when user start to use pyflink ?
Or do you mean to set up python environment for pyflink's CI build ?
Regarding this problem "It needs a proper Python environment(i.e. Python
3.5+, setuptools, etc
Hi all,
We have reached a consensus that the PyFlink package should be published to
PyPI in [1]. Thanks to Jincheng's effort, the PyPI account has already been
created and available to use now [2]. It means that we could publish PyFlink to
PyPI in the coming releases and it also means that addi
