[jira] [Commented] (TINKERPOP-2203) Bind the console timeout to the request timeout

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16827111#comment-16827111 ] ASF GitHub Bot commented on TINKERPOP-2203: --- spmallette commented on pull r

Re: Using a bot to keep dependencies up to date

Thanks again for investigating. > I can try that out and if it's actually helpful add something to our > development docs. Ideally we have simple commands to run for all GLVs to > keep them updated in the future. +1 for this approach for sure though :) On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:49 AM Florian Ho

Re: Using a bot to keep dependencies up to date

I just reached out to ASF Infra and that basically concluded this discussion as they simply don't allow any GitHub bots that require write access to the repo which includes dependabot unfortunately. We could only enable it on a fork and then forward the PRs from there to the main repo which we cou

[jira] [Created] (TINKERPOP-2203) Bind the console timeout to the request timeout

stephen mallette created TINKERPOP-2203: --- Summary: Bind the console timeout to the request timeout Key: TINKERPOP-2203 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2203 Project: TinkerPop

Re: [TinkerPop] Re: A TP4 Structure Agnostic Bytecode Specification (The Universal Structure)

These past few days, I have had some requests for a more detailed write-up of the data model, so here goes. See also my Global Graph Summit presentation . *

Re: [DISCUSS] The Two Protocols of TP4

> are you saying that we should write an ANTLR parser that compiles Gremlin-XXX into Bytecode directly? Not exactly. Currently users can send either bytecode or groovy scripts to be executed on the server. I'm saying we replace "groovy scripts evaluation" with "gremlin groovy traversal execution"

Re: What makes 'graph traversals' and 'relational joins' the same?

Trying to catch up on threads a bit...enjoying the discussion and I hope I'm following along fully because it's sounding really nice. Letting the type system be so open in previous versions of TinkerPop has created so many inconsistencies and inelegant solutions which have only be exaggerated by Gr

Re: TP4 Processors now support both push- and pull-based semantics.

On 2019/04/24 12:19:54, Marko Rodriguez wrote: > Hello, > > > I think it would be better to either expose Flowable on the API (or Flow if > > you don't want to be tied in to RxJava) > > We definitely don’t want to expose anything “provider specific.” Especially > at the Processor interface