flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kostas Tzoumas <ktzou...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Using Scala to reimplement the JobManager and TaskManager
Date Thu, 04 Sep 2014 08:50:15 GMT
+1




On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljoscha@apache.org>
wrote:

> +1
> I think it's good to outsource functionality that is not our main
> competency. Because of the origins of Flink in research we suffered a
> bit from NIH in the beginning. I'm happy to see this reduced piece by
> piece now.
>
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:50 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > You can create patch then ask for VOTE as needed but with a lot of
> > work involved I think it would be better to get some kind of agreement
> > of the proposed solution before continuing.
> >
> > - Henry
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Sebastian Schelter <ssc@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Ufuk,
> >>
> >> It is up to the project where to vote upfront before working on a code
> >> change or whether to do it afterwards.
> >>
> >> --sebastian
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-09-03 15:55 GMT-07:00 Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org>:
> >>
> >>> Hey Daniel,
> >>>
> >>> I am sure that Till didn't try to set up the vote towards his desired
> >>> outcome. Actually it should conform to the Apache Voting Process.
> >>>
> >>> Quoting from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html:
> >>>
> >>> "Expressing Votes: +1, 0, -1, and Fractions
> >>>
> >>> The voting process in Apache may seem more than a little weird if
> you've
> >>> never encountered it before. Votes are represented as numbers between
> -1
> >>> and +1, with '-1' meaning 'no' and '+1' meaning 'yes.'
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>> +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
> >>> -0: 'I won't get in the way, but I'd rather we didn't do this.'
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>> Vetos
> >>>
> >>> A code-modification proposal may be stopped dead in its tracks by a -1
> vote
> >>> by a qualified voter. This constitutes a veto, and it cannot be
> overruled
> >>> nor overridden by anyone. Vetos stand until and unless withdrawn by
> their
> >>> casters.
> >>>
> >>> To prevent vetos from being used capriciously, they must be
> accompanied by
> >>> a technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a
> security
> >>> exposure, negatively affects performance, etc. ). A veto without a
> >>> justification is invalid and has no weight."
> >>>
> >>> The only thing I'm not sure about is whether "upfront" votes are
> usual. If
> >>> this was a code modification (PR or commit), the way that this is setup
> >>> should definitely be OK. Maybe a mentor can help with this?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:11 AM, Daniel Warneke <warneke@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Hi,
> >>> >
> >>> > sorry, but I think the way this vote is set up is already biased
> towards
> >>> > the author’s desired outcome. Two out of the three possible options
> >>> > effectively lead to the switch to Scala. Moreover, the -1 option
> requires
> >>> > the voter to explain his/her decision, the +1 option does not.
> >>> >
> >>> > Best regards,
> >>> >
> >>> >     Daniel
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Am 03.09.2014 22:58, schrieb Till Rohrmann:
> >>> >
> >>> >  In the wake of replacing the current proprietary RPC service with
an
> >>> Akka
> >>> >> service, we have to rewrite the JobManager and TaskManager. Akka
is
> >>> >> implemented in Scala and offers bindings for Scala as well as Java.
> >>> Since
> >>> >> the implementation using Scala would probably be neater and less
> >>> verbose,
> >>> >> we would like to use Scala for the reimplementation. That would
> imply
> >>> that
> >>> >> Flink's runtime module would become a mixed Java and Scala project.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> So please vote whether Scala should be used for rewriting the
> JobManager
> >>> >> and TaskManager or not.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> [ ] +1 Using Scala for reimplementation
> >>> >> [ ]  0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with using
Scala
> >>> >> [ ] -1 Do not use Scala because...
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message