flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Spargel API for 0.9
Date Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:56:44 GMT
Thanks for bringing up for discussion, Vasia


I am +1 for deprecating Spargel for 0.9 release.

It is confusing for new comer (well even for me) to Flink and found
out there are 2 sets of Graph APIs.

We could use 0.9 release as stabilization period for Gelly, which is
why Spargel is deprecated and not removed, and by next release we have
more time to flush it out and hopefully we could remove Spargel (maybe
keep it deprecated one more time).

But I think there should be only ONE Graph API that Flink should
promote and I think it should be Gelly at this point.

- Henry

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Vasiliki Kalavri
<vasilikikalavri@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like your opinion on whether we should deprecate the Spargel API in
> 0.9.
>
> Gelly doesn't depend on Spargel, it actually contains it -- we have copied
> the relevant classes over. I think it would be a good idea to deprecate
> Spargel in 0.9, so that we can inform existing Spargel users that we'll
> eventually remove it.
>
> Also, I think the fact that we have 2 Graph APIs in the documentation might
> be a bit confusing for newcomers. One might wonder why do we have them both
> and when shall they use one over the other?
>
> It might be a good idea to add a note in the Spargel guide that would
> suggest to use Gelly instead and a corresponding note in the beginning of
> the Gelly guide to explain that Spargel is part of Gelly now. Or maybe a
> "Gelly or Spargel?" section. What do you think?
>
> The only thing that worries me is that the Gelly API is not very stable. Of
> course, we are mostly adding things, but we are planning to make some
> changes as well and I'm sure more will be needed the more we use it.
>
> Looking forward to your thoughts!
>
> Cheers,
> Vasia.

Mime
View raw message