Hi,
In an offline discussion with other Flink committers, we came up with the idea to mark new components from the "flink-staging" module with a "Beta" badge in the documentation. This way, we make it very clear that the component is still under heavy development. If we agree on this, I'll file a JIRA and add the badge to the documentation. Best, Robert |
+1
Good idea. Users can accept API changes of “flink-staging” module with “Beta" badge. Regards. Chiwan Park (Sent with iPhone) > On Mar 29, 2015, at 11:38 PM, Robert Metzger <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi, > > In an offline discussion with other Flink committers, we came up with the > idea to mark new components from the "flink-staging" module with a "Beta" > badge in the documentation. > This way, we make it very clear that the component is still under heavy > development. > > If we agree on this, I'll file a JIRA and add the badge to the > documentation. > > > Best, > Robert |
+1
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Chiwan Park <[hidden email]> wrote: > +1 > > Good idea. Users can accept API changes of “flink-staging” module with > “Beta" badge. > > Regards. > Chiwan Park (Sent with iPhone) > > > > On Mar 29, 2015, at 11:38 PM, Robert Metzger <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > In an offline discussion with other Flink committers, we came up with the > > idea to mark new components from the "flink-staging" module with a "Beta" > > badge in the documentation. > > This way, we make it very clear that the component is still under heavy > > development. > > > > If we agree on this, I'll file a JIRA and add the badge to the > > documentation. > > > > > > Best, > > Robert > > |
In reply to this post by Chiwan Park
I also like the idea
+1 There was a discussion about tagging public API classes and methods, to make it very clear what APIs should be stable across versions and what might change. Can we solve these things together: public class ApiVisibility { public static @interface Public {}; public static @interface PublicBeta {}; public static @interface Internal{}; private ApiVisibility () {} } @ApiVisibility.Public public class SomeApiClass { } @ApiVisibility.PublicBeta public class EvolvingClass { } @ApiVisibility.Internal public class RuntimeClass { } Names are subject to debate ;-) On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Chiwan Park <[hidden email]> wrote: > +1 > > Good idea. Users can accept API changes of “flink-staging” module with > “Beta" badge. > > Regards. > Chiwan Park (Sent with iPhone) > > > > On Mar 29, 2015, at 11:38 PM, Robert Metzger <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > In an offline discussion with other Flink committers, we came up with the > > idea to mark new components from the "flink-staging" module with a "Beta" > > badge in the documentation. > > This way, we make it very clear that the component is still under heavy > > development. > > > > If we agree on this, I'll file a JIRA and add the badge to the > > documentation. > > > > > > Best, > > Robert > > |
In reply to this post by Robert Metzger
+1 to this.
Was thinking about the same thing. - Henry On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Robert Metzger <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi, > > In an offline discussion with other Flink committers, we came up with the > idea to mark new components from the "flink-staging" module with a "Beta" > badge in the documentation. > This way, we make it very clear that the component is still under heavy > development. > > If we agree on this, I'll file a JIRA and add the badge to the > documentation. > > > Best, > Robert |
+1 for using annotations to mark the status of API classes/methods. I think
that is very good practice to manage backwards-compatibility. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Henry Saputra <[hidden email]> wrote: > +1 to this. > > Was thinking about the same thing. > > - Henry > > > > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Robert Metzger <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > In an offline discussion with other Flink committers, we came up with the > > idea to mark new components from the "flink-staging" module with a "Beta" > > badge in the documentation. > > This way, we make it very clear that the component is still under heavy > > development. > > > > If we agree on this, I'll file a JIRA and add the badge to the > > documentation. > > > > > > Best, > > Robert > |
I filed the JIRA for the beta badge:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1800 On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Maximilian Michels <[hidden email]> wrote: > +1 for using annotations to mark the status of API classes/methods. I think > that is very good practice to manage backwards-compatibility. > > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Henry Saputra <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > +1 to this. > > > > Was thinking about the same thing. > > > > - Henry > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Robert Metzger <[hidden email]> > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > In an offline discussion with other Flink committers, we came up with > the > > > idea to mark new components from the "flink-staging" module with a > "Beta" > > > badge in the documentation. > > > This way, we make it very clear that the component is still under heavy > > > development. > > > > > > If we agree on this, I'll file a JIRA and add the badge to the > > > documentation. > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > Robert > > > |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |