Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
Github user bbonnin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-166244559
For LICENCE issue, I have removed the library references that already exist
with the same grouId/artifactId, if they have a different version and the same
Github user bzz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-166488973
Looks great to me.
Thank you for awesome contribution with test & docs \w screenshots!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user bzz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-166230789
This is a good question boiling down how the build system resolve such
conflicts at the build time, but that's our of scope of this PR I suppose.
As for
Github user bbonnin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-165996942
@bzz I have checked LICENCE file, and I have seen that no duplicates,
except for some components that have differents versions (for example, there
are 2
Github user bzz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-165945834
@bbonnin Great! Merging latest master in should fix the CI.
Also, can you please make sure that there are no duplicates introduced in
the `LICENCE` file.
Github user bbonnin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-165447978
In the last commit, I have added the possibility to search by just
providingthe content of a quey_string. I think it's simpler and based on Lucene
query
Github user felixcheung commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-163836486
otherwise looks good, thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user bbonnin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162837690
Thanks to all for your comments!
About the DSL, my goal was not reinvent the wheel, but just provide a
simple way to access Elasticsearch.
I
Github user bbonnin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162946682
For shield, we have to deploy the interpreter with the shield jar. For the
configuration, just add the property "shield.user" in the interpreter
Github user jeffsteinmetz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162939814
Nice!. That makes sense regarding field flattening. thank you for the
follow up.
Still curious about how the community feels about Zeppelin
Github user jeffsteinmetz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162940896
One more thing I thought of as a use case - how would it handle Shield
security?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user bbonnin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162941101
@bzz For the licence file, is there an easy way to complete this file ?
Somethig like "mvn license:put-the third-party-licences-in-a-file" ?
---
If your
Github user jeffsteinmetz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162800158
Things also get interesting when you return Json with nested objects and
try to treat them like a flat relational database response (shown in the
GitHub user bbonnin opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520
Add an Elasticsearch interpreter
### Elasticsearch Interpreter
Interpreter for querying ElasticSearch .
Supported requests are "get document by id" , "search documents" , "delete
Github user jeffsteinmetz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162749562
I love the idea of making elasticsearch a first class cititen to Zeppelin.
I was curious however, as you build out the query language,
Github user felixcheung commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162752586
@jeffsteinmetz has a good point about ES Query DSL. I'm not sure we should
require Spark for ES though. Thought?
---
If your project is set up for it,
Github user bzz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/520#issuecomment-162731837
:+1: for docs and tests!
I might be wrong, but because all interpreters right now are part of the
Zeppelin releases, in my understanding we also need
18 matches
Mail list logo
