You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@beam.apache.org by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> on 2018/10/10 20:32:29 UTC
[DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Hi all,
We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in the past
and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it [2]. and I
think we should pick it up again. The description I really liked was
"strategic and user impacting initiatives (ongoing and future) in an easy
to consume format" [3]. It seems that we had feedback asking for a Roadmap
at the London summit [4].
I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what would be on
it:
- What style / format should it have to be most useful for users?
- Where should it be presented?
I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web site, as a
test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on first, so that's a
starting problem. They didn't even find Works In Progress [5] after
clicking Contribute. The level of detail of that list varies widely.
I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to balance
pithiness with crucial details.
Kenn
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
[2]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
[3]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
[4]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
[5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org>.
Hi Kenn,
This looks great, thanks!
As follow-up, we can probably also move the following to the Wiki:
https://beam.apache.org/contribute/design-documents/
Thomas
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 7:45 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> OK. I have taken everyone's feedback into account. Preview at
> http://apache-beam-website-pull-requests.storage.googleapis.com/6718/roadmap/index.html
>
> Summary:
>
> - Rephrased the highlights to be more dignified
> - Filled out everything I could think of to get specific roadmaps started
> - Moved portability roadmap to the new roadmap
> - Moved portability design docs (and others) to
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BEAM/Apache+Beam
> - Moved "ongoing projects" to
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BEAM/Apache+Beam
>
> Kenn
>
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 9:08 AM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> I would suggest to also modify https://beam.apache.org/contribute/ to
>> point to the new structure and remove duplicate content such as
>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 6:09 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> it sounds good to me. I have some more long term ideas as well.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 20/10/2018 03:09, Ahmet Altay wrote:
>>> > I looked at #6718, I think this is great as a starting point and not
>>> > just a mock. I particularly like that:
>>> > - It divides the roadmap along major component areas (SDKs, runners,
>>> > portability). This is good because (a) it provides a complete top down
>>> > picture and (b) allows groups of people working in these areas to build
>>> > their own roadmaps. This division would empower people working in those
>>> > components to build mini-roadmaps. This make sense to me because people
>>> > with most context in those components would likely to already have some
>>> > vision somewhere about the future of those components and they are
>>> > already working towards realizing those. Now, they can share it with
>>> > rest of the community and users in a structured way.
>>> > - The other good bit is that, there is a index page that pulls major
>>> > bits from each individual roadmap and provides a coherent list of where
>>> > the project is going. It would be very easy for users to just look at
>>> > this page and get a sense of the where the project is going.
>>> >
>>> > I believe this break down makes it easier for the most folks in the
>>> > community to participate in the process of building and roadmap. In my
>>> > opinion, we can merge Kenn's _mock_ and ask people to start filling in
>>> > the areas they care about.
>>> >
>>> > Ahmet
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I mocked up a little something
>>> > on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718
>>> > <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718>.
>>> >
>>> > Kenn
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible
>>> enough.
>>> > It is also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a
>>> > list of current and proposed initiatives?
>>> >
>>> > I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer
>>> > individual, per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way
>>> > they are easy to maintain by respective contributors.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <
>>> kenn@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It
>>> > should not look like a company's roadmap. This is just a
>>> > term that users search for and ask for. It might be an
>>> > incremental improvement
>>> > on https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>> > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress> to
>>> > present it more for users, to just give them a picture of
>>> > the trajectory. For example, Beam Python on Flink would
>>> > probably be of considerable interest but it is buried at
>>> > https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status
>>> > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status>.
>>> >
>>> > Kenn
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <
>>> thw@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored.
>>> It
>>> > may convey the impression of an outside entity that
>>> > controls what is being worked on and when. At least in
>>> > theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
>>> > decide what they take up. There are projects that have
>>> a
>>> > "list of initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that
>>> > are either in idea phase or ongoing. Those provide an
>>> > idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
>>> > sufficient for those looking for the overall
>>> direction?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles
>>> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Did some searching about to see what other projects
>>> > have done. Most OSS projects with open governance
>>> > don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here are
>>> > some from various [types of] projects. Please
>>> > contribute links for any project you can think of
>>> > that might be interesting examples.
>>> >
>>> > My personal favorite for readability and content is
>>> > Bazel. It does not do timelines, but says what they
>>> > are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, items
>>> > than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some
>>> > breakouts into roadmaps for sub-bits.
>>> >
>>> > Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and
>>> > readable though)
>>> > -
>>> >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>>> > <
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>>> >
>>> > -
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>>> > <
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs
>>> not
>>> > in real readable format):
>>> > -
>>> https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>>> > <
>>> https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html>
>>> >
>>> > Apache Apex
>>> > - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>>> > <http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html>
>>> >
>>> > Apache Calcite Avatica
>>> > -
>>> https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>>> > <
>>> https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html>
>>> >
>>> > Apache Kafka
>>> > -
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
>>> > <
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan>
>>> >
>>> > Tensorflow
>>> > - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>>> > <https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap>
>>> >
>>> > Kubernetes
>>> > -
>>> https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>>> > <
>>> https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones>
>>> >
>>> > Firefox
>>> > - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>>> > <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap>
>>> >
>>> > Servo
>>> > - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>>> > <https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap>
>>> >
>>> > Bazel
>>> > - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>>> > <https://bazel.build/roadmap.html>
>>> >
>>> > Kenn
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson
>>> > <timrobertson100@gmail.com
>>> > <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Thanks Kenn,
>>> >
>>> > I think this is a very good idea.
>>> >
>>> > My preference would be part of the website and
>>> > not on a wiki. Those who need to contribute can
>>> > do so easily and I find wikis often get
>>> > messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also
>>> > mean that we can use dev@ and Jira to track,
>>> > discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content
>>> > in a more controlled manner than a wiki which
>>> > can change without notification.
>>> >
>>> > I find it difficult to provide input on style /
>>> > format without mentioning what might be on it
>>> > I'm afraid.
>>> >
>>> > - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?)
>>> with
>>> > links out to Jiras for more detail and to help
>>> > show transparent progress
>>> >
>>> > - Potential users currently observing the
>>> > project is a very important audience IMO
>>> > (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users
>>> > seeking Kerberos support, AWS cloud users etc).
>>> > Might it help for us to identify the audiences
>>> > the roadmap is intended for to help steer the
>>> style?
>>> >
>>> > Tim
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles
>>> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev
>>> > community, while important stuff for users
>>> > should go on the web site. But
>>> experimenting
>>> > with the content on cwiki seems like a
>>> quick
>>> > and easy thing to try out.
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian
>>> > Michels <mxm@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Great idea, Kenn!
>>> >
>>> > How about putting the roadmap in the
>>> > Confluent wiki? We can link the
>>> > page from the web site.
>>> >
>>> > The timeline should not be too specific
>>> > but should give users an idea of
>>> > what to expect.
>>> >
>>> > On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> wrote:
>>> > > What about a link in the menu. It
>>> > should contain a list of features and
>>> > > estimate date with probable error
>>> > (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>> > > otherwise it does not bring much
>>> IMHO.
>>> > >
>>> > > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth
>>> > Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>
>>> > > <mailto:kenn@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>>> a écrit :
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi all,
>>> > >
>>> > > We made an attempt at putting
>>> > together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
>>> > > past and also some wide-ranging
>>> > threads about what could be on it
>>> > > [2]. and I think we should pick
>>> it
>>> > up again. The description I
>>> > > really liked was "strategic and
>>> > user impacting initiatives (ongoing
>>> > > and future) in an easy to consume
>>> > format" [3]. It seems that we had
>>> > > feedback asking for a Roadmap at
>>> > the London summit [4].
>>> > >
>>> > > I would like to first focus on
>>> > meta-questions rather than what would
>>> > > be on it:
>>> > >
>>> > > - What style / format should it
>>> > have to be most useful for users?
>>> > > - Where should it be presented?
>>> > >
>>> > > I asked a couple people to try to
>>> > find the roadmap on the web site,
>>> > > as a test, and they didn't really
>>> > know which tab to click on first,
>>> > > so that's a starting problem.
>>> They
>>> > didn't even find Works In
>>> > > Progress [5] after clicking
>>> > Contribute. The level of detail of that
>>> > > list varies widely.
>>> > >
>>> > > I'd also love to see hypothetical
>>> > formats for it, to see how to
>>> > > balance pithiness with crucial
>>> > details.
>>> > >
>>> > > Kenn
>>> > >
>>> > > [1]
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> > <
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> >
>>> > > [2]
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> > <
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> >
>>> > > [3]
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> > <
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> >
>>> > > [4]
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> > <
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > [5]
>>> >
>>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>> > <
>>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
OK. I have taken everyone's feedback into account. Preview at
http://apache-beam-website-pull-requests.storage.googleapis.com/6718/roadmap/index.html
Summary:
- Rephrased the highlights to be more dignified
- Filled out everything I could think of to get specific roadmaps started
- Moved portability roadmap to the new roadmap
- Moved portability design docs (and others) to
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BEAM/Apache+Beam
- Moved "ongoing projects" to
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BEAM/Apache+Beam
Kenn
On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 9:08 AM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> I would suggest to also modify https://beam.apache.org/contribute/ to
> point to the new structure and remove duplicate content such as
> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/
>
> Thanks
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 6:09 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> it sounds good to me. I have some more long term ideas as well.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 20/10/2018 03:09, Ahmet Altay wrote:
>> > I looked at #6718, I think this is great as a starting point and not
>> > just a mock. I particularly like that:
>> > - It divides the roadmap along major component areas (SDKs, runners,
>> > portability). This is good because (a) it provides a complete top down
>> > picture and (b) allows groups of people working in these areas to build
>> > their own roadmaps. This division would empower people working in those
>> > components to build mini-roadmaps. This make sense to me because people
>> > with most context in those components would likely to already have some
>> > vision somewhere about the future of those components and they are
>> > already working towards realizing those. Now, they can share it with
>> > rest of the community and users in a structured way.
>> > - The other good bit is that, there is a index page that pulls major
>> > bits from each individual roadmap and provides a coherent list of where
>> > the project is going. It would be very easy for users to just look at
>> > this page and get a sense of the where the project is going.
>> >
>> > I believe this break down makes it easier for the most folks in the
>> > community to participate in the process of building and roadmap. In my
>> > opinion, we can merge Kenn's _mock_ and ask people to start filling in
>> > the areas they care about.
>> >
>> > Ahmet
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I mocked up a little something
>> > on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718
>> > <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718>.
>> >
>> > Kenn
>> >
>> > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough.
>> > It is also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a
>> > list of current and proposed initiatives?
>> >
>> > I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer
>> > individual, per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way
>> > they are easy to maintain by respective contributors.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <
>> kenn@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It
>> > should not look like a company's roadmap. This is just a
>> > term that users search for and ask for. It might be an
>> > incremental improvement
>> > on https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>> > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress> to
>> > present it more for users, to just give them a picture of
>> > the trajectory. For example, Beam Python on Flink would
>> > probably be of considerable interest but it is buried at
>> > https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status
>> > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status>.
>> >
>> > Kenn
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <
>> thw@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It
>> > may convey the impression of an outside entity that
>> > controls what is being worked on and when. At least in
>> > theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
>> > decide what they take up. There are projects that have a
>> > "list of initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that
>> > are either in idea phase or ongoing. Those provide an
>> > idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
>> > sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles
>> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Did some searching about to see what other projects
>> > have done. Most OSS projects with open governance
>> > don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here are
>> > some from various [types of] projects. Please
>> > contribute links for any project you can think of
>> > that might be interesting examples.
>> >
>> > My personal favorite for readability and content is
>> > Bazel. It does not do timelines, but says what they
>> > are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, items
>> > than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some
>> > breakouts into roadmaps for sub-bits.
>> >
>> > Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and
>> > readable though)
>> > -
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>> > <
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>> >
>> > -
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>> > <
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>> >
>> >
>> > Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not
>> > in real readable format):
>> > -
>> https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>> > <
>> https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html>
>> >
>> > Apache Apex
>> > - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>> > <http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html>
>> >
>> > Apache Calcite Avatica
>> > -
>> https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>> > <
>> https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html>
>> >
>> > Apache Kafka
>> > -
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
>> > <
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan>
>> >
>> > Tensorflow
>> > - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>> > <https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap>
>> >
>> > Kubernetes
>> > -
>> https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>> > <
>> https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones>
>> >
>> > Firefox
>> > - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>> > <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap>
>> >
>> > Servo
>> > - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>> > <https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap>
>> >
>> > Bazel
>> > - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>> > <https://bazel.build/roadmap.html>
>> >
>> > Kenn
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson
>> > <timrobertson100@gmail.com
>> > <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Thanks Kenn,
>> >
>> > I think this is a very good idea.
>> >
>> > My preference would be part of the website and
>> > not on a wiki. Those who need to contribute can
>> > do so easily and I find wikis often get
>> > messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also
>> > mean that we can use dev@ and Jira to track,
>> > discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content
>> > in a more controlled manner than a wiki which
>> > can change without notification.
>> >
>> > I find it difficult to provide input on style /
>> > format without mentioning what might be on it
>> > I'm afraid.
>> >
>> > - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with
>> > links out to Jiras for more detail and to help
>> > show transparent progress
>> >
>> > - Potential users currently observing the
>> > project is a very important audience IMO
>> > (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users
>> > seeking Kerberos support, AWS cloud users etc).
>> > Might it help for us to identify the audiences
>> > the roadmap is intended for to help steer the
>> style?
>> >
>> > Tim
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles
>> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev
>> > community, while important stuff for users
>> > should go on the web site. But experimenting
>> > with the content on cwiki seems like a quick
>> > and easy thing to try out.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian
>> > Michels <mxm@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Great idea, Kenn!
>> >
>> > How about putting the roadmap in the
>> > Confluent wiki? We can link the
>> > page from the web site.
>> >
>> > The timeline should not be too specific
>> > but should give users an idea of
>> > what to expect.
>> >
>> > On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> wrote:
>> > > What about a link in the menu. It
>> > should contain a list of features and
>> > > estimate date with probable error
>> > (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>> > > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>> > >
>> > > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth
>> > Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>
>> > > <mailto:kenn@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>>> a écrit :
>> > >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > We made an attempt at putting
>> > together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
>> > > past and also some wide-ranging
>> > threads about what could be on it
>> > > [2]. and I think we should pick it
>> > up again. The description I
>> > > really liked was "strategic and
>> > user impacting initiatives (ongoing
>> > > and future) in an easy to consume
>> > format" [3]. It seems that we had
>> > > feedback asking for a Roadmap at
>> > the London summit [4].
>> > >
>> > > I would like to first focus on
>> > meta-questions rather than what would
>> > > be on it:
>> > >
>> > > - What style / format should it
>> > have to be most useful for users?
>> > > - Where should it be presented?
>> > >
>> > > I asked a couple people to try to
>> > find the roadmap on the web site,
>> > > as a test, and they didn't really
>> > know which tab to click on first,
>> > > so that's a starting problem. They
>> > didn't even find Works In
>> > > Progress [5] after clicking
>> > Contribute. The level of detail of that
>> > > list varies widely.
>> > >
>> > > I'd also love to see hypothetical
>> > formats for it, to see how to
>> > > balance pithiness with crucial
>> > details.
>> > >
>> > > Kenn
>> > >
>> > > [1]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > <
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> >
>> > > [2]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > <
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> >
>> > > [3]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > <
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> >
>> > > [4]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > <
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> >
>> > >
>> > > [5]
>> >
>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>> > <
>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress>
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org>.
+1
I would suggest to also modify https://beam.apache.org/contribute/ to point
to the new structure and remove duplicate content such as
https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/
Thanks
On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 6:09 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:
> +1
>
> it sounds good to me. I have some more long term ideas as well.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 20/10/2018 03:09, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> > I looked at #6718, I think this is great as a starting point and not
> > just a mock. I particularly like that:
> > - It divides the roadmap along major component areas (SDKs, runners,
> > portability). This is good because (a) it provides a complete top down
> > picture and (b) allows groups of people working in these areas to build
> > their own roadmaps. This division would empower people working in those
> > components to build mini-roadmaps. This make sense to me because people
> > with most context in those components would likely to already have some
> > vision somewhere about the future of those components and they are
> > already working towards realizing those. Now, they can share it with
> > rest of the community and users in a structured way.
> > - The other good bit is that, there is a index page that pulls major
> > bits from each individual roadmap and provides a coherent list of where
> > the project is going. It would be very easy for users to just look at
> > this page and get a sense of the where the project is going.
> >
> > I believe this break down makes it easier for the most folks in the
> > community to participate in the process of building and roadmap. In my
> > opinion, we can merge Kenn's _mock_ and ask people to start filling in
> > the areas they care about.
> >
> > Ahmet
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > I mocked up a little something
> > on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718
> > <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718>.
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough.
> > It is also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a
> > list of current and proposed initiatives?
> >
> > I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer
> > individual, per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way
> > they are easy to maintain by respective contributors.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It
> > should not look like a company's roadmap. This is just a
> > term that users search for and ask for. It might be an
> > incremental improvement
> > on https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
> > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress> to
> > present it more for users, to just give them a picture of
> > the trajectory. For example, Beam Python on Flink would
> > probably be of considerable interest but it is buried at
> > https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status
> > <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status>.
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It
> > may convey the impression of an outside entity that
> > controls what is being worked on and when. At least in
> > theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
> > decide what they take up. There are projects that have a
> > "list of initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that
> > are either in idea phase or ongoing. Those provide an
> > idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
> > sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles
> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Did some searching about to see what other projects
> > have done. Most OSS projects with open governance
> > don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here are
> > some from various [types of] projects. Please
> > contribute links for any project you can think of
> > that might be interesting examples.
> >
> > My personal favorite for readability and content is
> > Bazel. It does not do timelines, but says what they
> > are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, items
> > than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some
> > breakouts into roadmaps for sub-bits.
> >
> > Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and
> > readable though)
> > -
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
> > <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
> >
> > -
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
> > <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
> >
> >
> > Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not
> > in real readable format):
> > -
> https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
> > <https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
> >
> >
> > Apache Apex
> > - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
> > <http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html>
> >
> > Apache Calcite Avatica
> > -
> https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
> > <
> https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html>
> >
> > Apache Kafka
> > -
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
> > <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan>
> >
> > Tensorflow
> > - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
> > <https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap>
> >
> > Kubernetes
> > -
> https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
> > <https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
> >
> >
> > Firefox
> > - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
> > <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap>
> >
> > Servo
> > - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
> > <https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap>
> >
> > Bazel
> > - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
> > <https://bazel.build/roadmap.html>
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson
> > <timrobertson100@gmail.com
> > <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Kenn,
> >
> > I think this is a very good idea.
> >
> > My preference would be part of the website and
> > not on a wiki. Those who need to contribute can
> > do so easily and I find wikis often get
> > messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also
> > mean that we can use dev@ and Jira to track,
> > discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content
> > in a more controlled manner than a wiki which
> > can change without notification.
> >
> > I find it difficult to provide input on style /
> > format without mentioning what might be on it
> > I'm afraid.
> >
> > - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with
> > links out to Jiras for more detail and to help
> > show transparent progress
> >
> > - Potential users currently observing the
> > project is a very important audience IMO
> > (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users
> > seeking Kerberos support, AWS cloud users etc).
> > Might it help for us to identify the audiences
> > the roadmap is intended for to help steer the
> style?
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles
> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
> wrote:
> >
> > Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev
> > community, while important stuff for users
> > should go on the web site. But experimenting
> > with the content on cwiki seems like a quick
> > and easy thing to try out.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian
> > Michels <mxm@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Great idea, Kenn!
> >
> > How about putting the roadmap in the
> > Confluent wiki? We can link the
> > page from the web site.
> >
> > The timeline should not be too specific
> > but should give users an idea of
> > what to expect.
> >
> > On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
> > > What about a link in the menu. It
> > should contain a list of features and
> > > estimate date with probable error
> > (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
> > > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
> > >
> > > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth
> > Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>
> > > <mailto:kenn@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>>> a écrit :
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We made an attempt at putting
> > together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
> > > past and also some wide-ranging
> > threads about what could be on it
> > > [2]. and I think we should pick it
> > up again. The description I
> > > really liked was "strategic and
> > user impacting initiatives (ongoing
> > > and future) in an easy to consume
> > format" [3]. It seems that we had
> > > feedback asking for a Roadmap at
> > the London summit [4].
> > >
> > > I would like to first focus on
> > meta-questions rather than what would
> > > be on it:
> > >
> > > - What style / format should it
> > have to be most useful for users?
> > > - Where should it be presented?
> > >
> > > I asked a couple people to try to
> > find the roadmap on the web site,
> > > as a test, and they didn't really
> > know which tab to click on first,
> > > so that's a starting problem. They
> > didn't even find Works In
> > > Progress [5] after clicking
> > Contribute. The level of detail of that
> > > list varies widely.
> > >
> > > I'd also love to see hypothetical
> > formats for it, to see how to
> > > balance pithiness with crucial
> > details.
> > >
> > > Kenn
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> >
> > > [2]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> >
> > > [3]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> >
> > > [4]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> >
> > >
> > > [5]
> >
> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
> > <
> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress>
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
+1
it sounds good to me. I have some more long term ideas as well.
Regards
JB
On 20/10/2018 03:09, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> I looked at #6718, I think this is great as a starting point and not
> just a mock. I particularly like that:
> - It divides the roadmap along major component areas (SDKs, runners,
> portability). This is good because (a) it provides a complete top down
> picture and (b) allows groups of people working in these areas to build
> their own roadmaps. This division would empower people working in those
> components to build mini-roadmaps. This make sense to me because people
> with most context in those components would likely to already have some
> vision somewhere about the future of those components and they are
> already working towards realizing those. Now, they can share it with
> rest of the community and users in a structured way.
> - The other good bit is that, there is a index page that pulls major
> bits from each individual roadmap and provides a coherent list of where
> the project is going. It would be very easy for users to just look at
> this page and get a sense of the where the project is going.
>
> I believe this break down makes it easier for the most folks in the
> community to participate in the process of building and roadmap. In my
> opinion, we can merge Kenn's _mock_ and ask people to start filling in
> the areas they care about.
>
> Ahmet
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> I mocked up a little something
> on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718
> <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718>.
>
> Kenn
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough.
> It is also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a
> list of current and proposed initiatives?
>
> I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer
> individual, per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way
> they are easy to maintain by respective contributors.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It
> should not look like a company's roadmap. This is just a
> term that users search for and ask for. It might be an
> incremental improvement
> on https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
> <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress> to
> present it more for users, to just give them a picture of
> the trajectory. For example, Beam Python on Flink would
> probably be of considerable interest but it is buried at
> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status
> <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status>.
>
> Kenn
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It
> may convey the impression of an outside entity that
> controls what is being worked on and when. At least in
> theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
> decide what they take up. There are projects that have a
> "list of initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that
> are either in idea phase or ongoing. Those provide an
> idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
> sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles
> <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Did some searching about to see what other projects
> have done. Most OSS projects with open governance
> don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here are
> some from various [types of] projects. Please
> contribute links for any project you can think of
> that might be interesting examples.
>
> My personal favorite for readability and content is
> Bazel. It does not do timelines, but says what they
> are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, items
> than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some
> breakouts into roadmaps for sub-bits.
>
> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and
> readable though)
> -
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan>
> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals>
>
> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not
> in real readable format):
> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
> <https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html>
>
> Apache Apex
> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
> <http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html>
>
> Apache Calcite Avatica
> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
> <https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html>
>
> Apache Kafka
> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan>
>
> Tensorflow
> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
> <https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap>
>
> Kubernetes
> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
> <https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones>
>
> Firefox
> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
> <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap>
>
> Servo
> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
> <https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap>
>
> Bazel
> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
> <https://bazel.build/roadmap.html>
>
> Kenn
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson
> <timrobertson100@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Thanks Kenn,
>
> I think this is a very good idea.
>
> My preference would be part of the website and
> not on a wiki. Those who need to contribute can
> do so easily and I find wikis often get
> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also
> mean that we can use dev@ and Jira to track,
> discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content
> in a more controlled manner than a wiki which
> can change without notification.
>
> I find it difficult to provide input on style /
> format without mentioning what might be on it
> I'm afraid.
>
> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with
> links out to Jiras for more detail and to help
> show transparent progress
>
> - Potential users currently observing the
> project is a very important audience IMO
> (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users
> seeking Kerberos support, AWS cloud users etc).
> Might it help for us to identify the audiences
> the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>
> Tim
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles
> <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev
> community, while important stuff for users
> should go on the web site. But experimenting
> with the content on cwiki seems like a quick
> and easy thing to try out.
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian
> Michels <mxm@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Great idea, Kenn!
>
> How about putting the roadmap in the
> Confluent wiki? We can link the
> page from the web site.
>
> The timeline should not be too specific
> but should give users an idea of
> what to expect.
>
> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > What about a link in the menu. It
> should contain a list of features and
> > estimate date with probable error
> (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
> >
> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth
> Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>
> > <mailto:kenn@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>>> a écrit :
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We made an attempt at putting
> together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
> > past and also some wide-ranging
> threads about what could be on it
> > [2]. and I think we should pick it
> up again. The description I
> > really liked was "strategic and
> user impacting initiatives (ongoing
> > and future) in an easy to consume
> format" [3]. It seems that we had
> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at
> the London summit [4].
> >
> > I would like to first focus on
> meta-questions rather than what would
> > be on it:
> >
> > - What style / format should it
> have to be most useful for users?
> > - Where should it be presented?
> >
> > I asked a couple people to try to
> find the roadmap on the web site,
> > as a test, and they didn't really
> know which tab to click on first,
> > so that's a starting problem. They
> didn't even find Works In
> > Progress [5] after clicking
> Contribute. The level of detail of that
> > list varies widely.
> >
> > I'd also love to see hypothetical
> formats for it, to see how to
> > balance pithiness with crucial
> details.
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
> > [2]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
> > [3]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
> > [4]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
> >
> > [5]
> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
> <https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress>
> >
>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by David Morávek <da...@gmail.com>.
+1 this looks like a great starting point. It is always beneficial for the user to know where the project is headed.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 20 Oct 2018, at 03:09, Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>
> I looked at #6718, I think this is great as a starting point and not just a mock. I particularly like that:
> - It divides the roadmap along major component areas (SDKs, runners, portability). This is good because (a) it provides a complete top down picture and (b) allows groups of people working in these areas to build their own roadmaps. This division would empower people working in those components to build mini-roadmaps. This make sense to me because people with most context in those components would likely to already have some vision somewhere about the future of those components and they are already working towards realizing those. Now, they can share it with rest of the community and users in a structured way.
> - The other good bit is that, there is a index page that pulls major bits from each individual roadmap and provides a coherent list of where the project is going. It would be very easy for users to just look at this page and get a sense of the where the project is going.
>
> I believe this break down makes it easier for the most folks in the community to participate in the process of building and roadmap. In my opinion, we can merge Kenn's _mock_ and ask people to start filling in the areas they care about.
>
> Ahmet
>
>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I mocked up a little something on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718.
>>
>> Kenn
>>
>>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough. It is also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a list of current and proposed initiatives?
>>>
>>> I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer individual, per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way they are easy to maintain by respective contributors.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It should not look like a company's roadmap. This is just a term that users search for and ask for. It might be an incremental improvement on https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress to present it more for users, to just give them a picture of the trajectory. For example, Beam Python on Flink would probably be of considerable interest but it is buried at https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status.
>>>>
>>>> Kenn
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any project you can think of that might be interesting examples.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not do timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger, items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into roadmaps for sub-bits.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though)
>>>>>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>>>>>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable format):
>>>>>> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache Apex
>>>>>> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache Calcite Avatica
>>>>>> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache Kafka
>>>>>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tensorflow
>>>>>> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kubernetes
>>>>>> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Firefox
>>>>>> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Servo
>>>>>> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bazel
>>>>>> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kenn
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson <ti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Thanks Kenn,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think this is a very good idea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those who need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@ and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without mentioning what might be on it I'm afraid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras for more detail and to help show transparent progress
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
>>>>>>>>> page from the web site.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea of
>>>>>>>>> what to expect.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features and
>>>>>>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>>>>>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>>>>>>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
>>>>>>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it
>>>>>>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>>>>>>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives (ongoing
>>>>>>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we had
>>>>>>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what would
>>>>>>>>> > be on it:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for users?
>>>>>>>>> > - Where should it be presented?
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web site,
>>>>>>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on first,
>>>>>>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>>>>>>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of that
>>>>>>>>> > list varies widely.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
>>>>>>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Kenn
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > [1]
>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>> > [2]
>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>> > [3]
>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>> > [4]
>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>>>>>>>> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com>.
I looked at #6718, I think this is great as a starting point and not just a
mock. I particularly like that:
- It divides the roadmap along major component areas (SDKs, runners,
portability). This is good because (a) it provides a complete top down
picture and (b) allows groups of people working in these areas to build
their own roadmaps. This division would empower people working in those
components to build mini-roadmaps. This make sense to me because people
with most context in those components would likely to already have some
vision somewhere about the future of those components and they are already
working towards realizing those. Now, they can share it with rest of the
community and users in a structured way.
- The other good bit is that, there is a index page that pulls major bits
from each individual roadmap and provides a coherent list of where the
project is going. It would be very easy for users to just look at this page
and get a sense of the where the project is going.
I believe this break down makes it easier for the most folks in the
community to participate in the process of building and roadmap. In my
opinion, we can merge Kenn's _mock_ and ask people to start filling in the
areas they care about.
Ahmet
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> I mocked up a little something on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718
> .
>
> Kenn
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough. It is
>> also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a list of current
>> and proposed initiatives?
>>
>> I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer individual,
>> per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way they are easy to
>> maintain by respective contributors.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It should not look
>>> like a company's roadmap. This is just a term that users search for and ask
>>> for. It might be an incremental improvement on https://beam.apache.org/
>>> contribute/#works-in-progress to present it more for users, to just
>>> give them a picture of the trajectory. For example, Beam Python on Flink
>>> would probably be of considerable interest but it is buried at
>>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status.
>>>
>>> Kenn
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the
>>>> impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and
>>>> when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
>>>> decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of
>>>> initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or
>>>> ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
>>>> sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most
>>>>> OSS projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT.
>>>>> Here are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for
>>>>> any project you can think of that might be interesting examples.
>>>>>
>>>>> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not
>>>>> do timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger,
>>>>> items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into
>>>>> roadmaps for sub-bits.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though)
>>>>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/
>>>>> Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>>>>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/
>>>>> Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable
>>>>> format):
>>>>> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache Apex
>>>>> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache Calcite Avatica
>>>>> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache Kafka
>>>>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/
>>>>> Future+release+plan
>>>>>
>>>>> Tensorflow
>>>>> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>>>>>
>>>>> Kubernetes
>>>>> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>>>>>
>>>>> Firefox
>>>>> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>>>>>
>>>>> Servo
>>>>> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>>>>>
>>>>> Bazel
>>>>> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Kenn
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson <
>>>>> timrobertson100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Kenn,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think this is a very good idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those
>>>>>> who need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get
>>>>>> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@
>>>>>> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a
>>>>>> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without
>>>>>> mentioning what might be on it I'm afraid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras
>>>>>> for more detail and to help show transparent progress
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important
>>>>>> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos
>>>>>> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the
>>>>>> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important
>>>>>>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the
>>>>>>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> page from the web site.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an
>>>>>>>> idea of
>>>>>>>> what to expect.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of
>>>>>>>> features and
>>>>>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>>>>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>>>>>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1]
>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be
>>>>>>>> on it
>>>>>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>>>>>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives
>>>>>>>> (ongoing
>>>>>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that
>>>>>>>> we had
>>>>>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than
>>>>>>>> what would
>>>>>>>> > be on it:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for
>>>>>>>> users?
>>>>>>>> > - Where should it be presented?
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web
>>>>>>>> site,
>>>>>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on
>>>>>>>> first,
>>>>>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>>>>>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail
>>>>>>>> of that
>>>>>>>> > list varies widely.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Kenn
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > [1]
>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
>>>>>>>> 4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%
>>>>>>>> 3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>> > [2]
>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
>>>>>>>> f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%
>>>>>>>> 3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>> > [3]
>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
>>>>>>>> 60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%
>>>>>>>> 3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>> > [4]
>>>>>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
>>>>>>>> aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%
>>>>>>>> 3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
I mocked up a little something on https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6718.
Kenn
On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 5:33 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
> Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough. It is
> also too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a list of current
> and proposed initiatives?
>
> I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer individual,
> per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way they are easy to
> maintain by respective contributors.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It should not look
>> like a company's roadmap. This is just a term that users search for and ask
>> for. It might be an incremental improvement on
>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress to present it more
>> for users, to just give them a picture of the trajectory. For example, Beam
>> Python on Flink would probably be of considerable interest but it is buried
>> at https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status.
>>
>> Kenn
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the
>>> impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and
>>> when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
>>> decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of
>>> initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or
>>> ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
>>> sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS
>>>> projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here
>>>> are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any
>>>> project you can think of that might be interesting examples.
>>>>
>>>> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not
>>>> do timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger,
>>>> items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into
>>>> roadmaps for sub-bits.
>>>>
>>>> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though)
>>>> -
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>>>> -
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>>>>
>>>> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable
>>>> format):
>>>> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>>>>
>>>> Apache Apex
>>>> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>>>>
>>>> Apache Calcite Avatica
>>>> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>>>>
>>>> Apache Kafka
>>>> -
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
>>>>
>>>> Tensorflow
>>>> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>>>>
>>>> Kubernetes
>>>> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>>>>
>>>> Firefox
>>>> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>>>>
>>>> Servo
>>>> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>>>>
>>>> Bazel
>>>> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>>>>
>>>> Kenn
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson <
>>>> timrobertson100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Kenn,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think this is a very good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those
>>>>> who need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get
>>>>> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@
>>>>> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a
>>>>> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
>>>>>
>>>>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without
>>>>> mentioning what might be on it I'm afraid.
>>>>>
>>>>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras
>>>>> for more detail and to help show transparent progress
>>>>>
>>>>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important
>>>>> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos
>>>>> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the
>>>>> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important
>>>>>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the
>>>>>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
>>>>>>> page from the web site.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an
>>>>>>> idea of
>>>>>>> what to expect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of
>>>>>>> features and
>>>>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>>>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>>>>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1]
>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>>>>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives
>>>>>>> (ongoing
>>>>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that
>>>>>>> we had
>>>>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> > be on it:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for
>>>>>>> users?
>>>>>>> > - Where should it be presented?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web
>>>>>>> site,
>>>>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on
>>>>>>> first,
>>>>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>>>>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> > list varies widely.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
>>>>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Kenn
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > [1]
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>> > [2]
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>> > [3]
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>> > [4]
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org>.
Indeed, our current in-progress subsection isn't visible enough. It is also
too coarse grained. Perhaps we can replace it with a list of current and
proposed initiatives?
I could see the index live on the web site, but would prefer individual,
per-initiative pages to live on the wiki. That way they are easy to
maintain by respective contributors.
Thanks
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It should not look
> like a company's roadmap. This is just a term that users search for and ask
> for. It might be an incremental improvement on
> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress to present it more
> for users, to just give them a picture of the trajectory. For example, Beam
> Python on Flink would probably be of considerable interest but it is buried
> at https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status.
>
> Kenn
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the
>> impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and
>> when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
>> decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of
>> initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or
>> ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
>> sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS
>>> projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here
>>> are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any
>>> project you can think of that might be interesting examples.
>>>
>>> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not
>>> do timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger,
>>> items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into
>>> roadmaps for sub-bits.
>>>
>>> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though)
>>> -
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>>> -
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>>>
>>> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable
>>> format):
>>> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>>>
>>> Apache Apex
>>> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>>>
>>> Apache Calcite Avatica
>>> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>>>
>>> Apache Kafka
>>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
>>>
>>> Tensorflow
>>> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>>>
>>> Kubernetes
>>> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>>>
>>> Firefox
>>> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>>>
>>> Servo
>>> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>>>
>>> Bazel
>>> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>>>
>>> Kenn
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson <
>>> timrobertson100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Kenn,
>>>>
>>>> I think this is a very good idea.
>>>>
>>>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those who
>>>> need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get
>>>> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@
>>>> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a
>>>> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
>>>>
>>>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without
>>>> mentioning what might be on it I'm afraid.
>>>>
>>>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras for
>>>> more detail and to help show transparent progress
>>>>
>>>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important
>>>> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos
>>>> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the
>>>> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important
>>>>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the
>>>>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
>>>>>> page from the web site.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> what to expect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>>>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>>>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives
>>>>>> (ongoing
>>>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we
>>>>>> had
>>>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> > be on it:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for
>>>>>> users?
>>>>>> > - Where should it be presented?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web
>>>>>> site,
>>>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on
>>>>>> first,
>>>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>>>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> > list varies widely.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
>>>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Kenn
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > [1]
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>> > [2]
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>> > [3]
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>> > [4]
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
I think we can easily steer clear of those concerns. It should not look
like a company's roadmap. This is just a term that users search for and ask
for. It might be an incremental improvement on
https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress to present it more
for users, to just give them a picture of the trajectory. For example, Beam
Python on Flink would probably be of considerable interest but it is buried
at https://beam.apache.org/contribute/portability/#status.
Kenn
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:49 PM Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org> wrote:
> As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the
> impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and
> when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
> decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of
> initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or
> ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
> sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS
>> projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here
>> are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any
>> project you can think of that might be interesting examples.
>>
>> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not do
>> timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger,
>> items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into
>> roadmaps for sub-bits.
>>
>> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though)
>> -
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
>> -
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>>
>> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable
>> format):
>> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>>
>> Apache Apex
>> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>>
>> Apache Calcite Avatica
>> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>>
>> Apache Kafka
>> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
>>
>> Tensorflow
>> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>>
>> Kubernetes
>> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>>
>> Firefox
>> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>>
>> Servo
>> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>>
>> Bazel
>> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>>
>> Kenn
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson <ti...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Kenn,
>>>
>>> I think this is a very good idea.
>>>
>>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those who
>>> need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get
>>> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@
>>> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a
>>> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
>>>
>>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without
>>> mentioning what might be on it I'm afraid.
>>>
>>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras for
>>> more detail and to help show transparent progress
>>>
>>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important
>>> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos
>>> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the
>>> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important
>>>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the
>>>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>>>>
>>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
>>>>> page from the web site.
>>>>>
>>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea
>>>>> of
>>>>> what to expect.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features
>>>>> and
>>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in
>>>>> the
>>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it
>>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives
>>>>> (ongoing
>>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we
>>>>> had
>>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what
>>>>> would
>>>>> > be on it:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for
>>>>> users?
>>>>> > - Where should it be presented?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web
>>>>> site,
>>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on
>>>>> first,
>>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of
>>>>> that
>>>>> > list varies widely.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
>>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Kenn
>>>>> >
>>>>> > [1]
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>> > [2]
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>> > [3]
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>> > [4]
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>> >
>>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Thomas Weise <th...@apache.org>.
As I understand it the term "roadmap" is not favored. It may convey the
impression of an outside entity that controls what is being worked on and
when. At least in theory contributions are volunteer work and individuals
decide what they take up. There are projects that have a "list of
initiatives" or "improvement proposals" that are either in idea phase or
ongoing. Those provide an idea what is on the radar and perhaps that is a
sufficient for those looking for the overall direction?
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS
> projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here
> are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any
> project you can think of that might be interesting examples.
>
> My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not do
> timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger,
> items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into
> roadmaps for sub-bits.
>
> Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though)
> -
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
> -
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>
> Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable
> format):
> - https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>
> Apache Apex
> - http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
>
> Apache Calcite Avatica
> - https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
>
> Apache Kafka
> - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
>
> Tensorflow
> - https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
>
> Kubernetes
> - https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
>
> Firefox
> - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
>
> Servo
> - https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
>
> Bazel
> - https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
>
> Kenn
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson <ti...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Kenn,
>>
>> I think this is a very good idea.
>>
>> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those who
>> need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get
>> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@
>> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a
>> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
>>
>> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without mentioning
>> what might be on it I'm afraid.
>>
>> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras for
>> more detail and to help show transparent progress
>>
>> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important
>> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos
>> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the
>> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important
>>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the
>>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>>>
>>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
>>>> page from the web site.
>>>>
>>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea
>>>> of
>>>> what to expect.
>>>>
>>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features
>>>> and
>>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>>>> >
>>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi all,
>>>> >
>>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in
>>>> the
>>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it
>>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives
>>>> (ongoing
>>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we
>>>> had
>>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>>>> >
>>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what
>>>> would
>>>> > be on it:
>>>> >
>>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for
>>>> users?
>>>> > - Where should it be presented?
>>>> >
>>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web
>>>> site,
>>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on
>>>> first,
>>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of
>>>> that
>>>> > list varies widely.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
>>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>>>> >
>>>> > Kenn
>>>> >
>>>> > [1]
>>>> >
>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>> > [2]
>>>> >
>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>> > [3]
>>>> >
>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>> > [4]
>>>> >
>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>> >
>>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
Did some searching about to see what other projects have done. Most OSS
projects with open governance don't actually have such a thing AFAICT. Here
are some from various [types of] projects. Please contribute links for any
project you can think of that might be interesting examples.
My personal favorite for readability and content is Bazel. It does not do
timelines, but says what they are most focused on. It has fewer, larger,
items than our "Ongoing Projects" section. Then some breakouts into
roadmaps for sub-bits.
Apache Flink (roadmap doc is stale, FLIPs nice and readable though)
-
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+and+Feature+Plan
-
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals
Apache Spark (no roadmap doc I could find, SPIPs not in real readable
format):
- https://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
Apache Apex
- http://apex.apache.org/roadmap.html
Apache Calcite Avatica
- https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/roadmap.html
Apache Kafka
- https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan
Tensorflow
- https://www.tensorflow.org/community/roadmap
Kubernetes
- https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/milestones
Firefox
- https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Roadmap
Servo
- https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Roadmap
Bazel
- https://bazel.build/roadmap.html
Kenn
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:34 AM Tim Robertson <ti...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thanks Kenn,
>
> I think this is a very good idea.
>
> My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those who
> need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get
> messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@
> and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a
> more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
>
> I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without mentioning
> what might be on it I'm afraid.
>
> - I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras for
> more detail and to help show transparent progress
>
> - Potential users currently observing the project is a very important
> audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos
> support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the
> audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
>
> Tim
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important
>> stuff for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the
>> content on cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>>
>>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
>>> page from the web site.
>>>
>>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea of
>>> what to expect.
>>>
>>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features
>>> and
>>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>>> >
>>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>> >
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
>>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it
>>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives (ongoing
>>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we had
>>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>>> >
>>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what
>>> would
>>> > be on it:
>>> >
>>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for users?
>>> > - Where should it be presented?
>>> >
>>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web site,
>>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on first,
>>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of that
>>> > list varies widely.
>>> >
>>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
>>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>>> >
>>> > Kenn
>>> >
>>> > [1]
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> > [2]
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> > [3]
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> > [4]
>>> >
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> >
>>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>>> >
>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Tim Robertson <ti...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Kenn,
I think this is a very good idea.
My preference would be part of the website and not on a wiki. Those who
need to contribute can do so easily and I find wikis often get
messy/stale/overwhelming. The website will also mean that we can use dev@
and Jira to track, discuss and help agree upon the roadmap content in a
more controlled manner than a wiki which can change without notification.
I find it difficult to provide input on style / format without mentioning
what might be on it I'm afraid.
- I'd favour a short concise read (7 mins?) with links out to Jiras for
more detail and to help show transparent progress
- Potential users currently observing the project is a very important
audience IMO (en-premise Hadoop users, enterprise users seeking Kerberos
support, AWS cloud users etc). Might it help for us to identify the
audiences the roadmap is intended for to help steer the style?
Tim
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important stuff
> for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the content on
> cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Great idea, Kenn!
>>
>> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
>> page from the web site.
>>
>> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea of
>> what to expect.
>>
>> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features and
>> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
>> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>> >
>> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
>> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
>> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it
>> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
>> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives (ongoing
>> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we had
>> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>> >
>> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what would
>> > be on it:
>> >
>> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for users?
>> > - Where should it be presented?
>> >
>> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web site,
>> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on first,
>> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
>> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of that
>> > list varies widely.
>> >
>> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
>> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
>> >
>> > Kenn
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > [2]
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > [3]
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> > [4]
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> >
>> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>> >
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
Personally, I think cwiki is best for dev community, while important stuff
for users should go on the web site. But experimenting with the content on
cwiki seems like a quick and easy thing to try out.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:43 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org> wrote:
> Great idea, Kenn!
>
> How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
> page from the web site.
>
> The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea of
> what to expect.
>
> On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features and
> > estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
> > otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
> >
> > Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
> > past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it
> > [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
> > really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives (ongoing
> > and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we had
> > feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
> >
> > I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what would
> > be on it:
> >
> > - What style / format should it have to be most useful for users?
> > - Where should it be presented?
> >
> > I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web site,
> > as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on first,
> > so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
> > Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of that
> > list varies widely.
> >
> > I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
> > balance pithiness with crucial details.
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > [2]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > [3]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > [4]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> >
> > [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>.
Great idea, Kenn!
How about putting the roadmap in the Confluent wiki? We can link the
page from the web site.
The timeline should not be too specific but should give users an idea of
what to expect.
On 10.10.18 22:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features and
> estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months)
> otherwise it does not bring much IMHO.
>
> Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
> We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in the
> past and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it
> [2]. and I think we should pick it up again. The description I
> really liked was "strategic and user impacting initiatives (ongoing
> and future) in an easy to consume format" [3]. It seems that we had
> feedback asking for a Roadmap at the London summit [4].
>
> I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what would
> be on it:
>
> - What style / format should it have to be most useful for users?
> - Where should it be presented?
>
> I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web site,
> as a test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on first,
> so that's a starting problem. They didn't even find Works In
> Progress [5] after clicking Contribute. The level of detail of that
> list varies widely.
>
> I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to
> balance pithiness with crucial details.
>
> Kenn
>
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> [2]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> [3]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> [4]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>
> [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Beam public roadmap
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
What about a link in the menu. It should contain a list of features and
estimate date with probable error (like "in 5 months +- 1 months) otherwise
it does not bring much IMHO.
Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 23:32, Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> We made an attempt at putting together a sort of roadmap [1] in the past
> and also some wide-ranging threads about what could be on it [2]. and I
> think we should pick it up again. The description I really liked was
> "strategic and user impacting initiatives (ongoing and future) in an easy
> to consume format" [3]. It seems that we had feedback asking for a Roadmap
> at the London summit [4].
>
> I would like to first focus on meta-questions rather than what would be on
> it:
>
> - What style / format should it have to be most useful for users?
> - Where should it be presented?
>
> I asked a couple people to try to find the roadmap on the web site, as a
> test, and they didn't really know which tab to click on first, so that's a
> starting problem. They didn't even find Works In Progress [5] after
> clicking Contribute. The level of detail of that list varies widely.
>
> I'd also love to see hypothetical formats for it, to see how to balance
> pithiness with crucial details.
>
> Kenn
>
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4e1fffa2fde8e750c6d769bf4335853ad05b360b8bd248ad119cc185@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> [2]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f750f288af8dab3f468b869bf5a3f473094f4764db419567f33805d0@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> [3]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/60d0333fd9e2c7be2f55e33b0d145f2908e3fe645c008636c86e1133@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> [4]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa1306da25029dff12a49ba3ce63f2caf6a5f8ba73eda879c8403f3f@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>
> [5] https://beam.apache.org/contribute/#works-in-progress
>