When consensus not happening we will go with VOTE. I think we have 2 candidates of names which are table and relation.
- Henry On Wednesday, March 25, 2015, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > I also prefer Relation. So what should we do? Doesn't really look like > consensus. > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Paris Carbone <par...@kth.se > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > Both names look ok but if I had to choose I would go for the Relation > API. > > It defines a new DSL in contrast to data types (ie DataSet, DataStream) > so it doesn’t have to follow the same convention. > > Plus, it is a single word with sufficient meaning. > > > > Paris > > > > On 21 Mar 2015, at 17:29, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com > <javascript:;><mailto:fhue...@gmail.com <javascript:;>>> wrote: > > > > I'm in favor of Relation API because the API operates on a set of tuples > > with a fixed (flat) schema which is known as relation from relational > > databases. > > > > Everybody who took a database intro class should be familiar with this > term. > > On Mar 21, 2015 5:14 PM, "Henry Saputra" <henry.sapu...@gmail.com > <javascript:;><mailto:henry.sapu...@gmail.com <javascript:;>>> wrote: > > > > I like the Relation or Relational. So maybe we could use DataRelation > > as the abstraction? > > > > - Henry > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com > <javascript:;><mailto:fhue...@gmail.com <javascript:;>>> wrote: > > I am also more in favor of Rel and Relation, but DataTable nicely follows > > the terms DataSet and DataStream. > > On Mar 16, 2015 4:58 PM, "Aljoscha Krettek" <aljos...@apache.org > <javascript:;><mailto:aljos...@apache.org <javascript:;>>> > > wrote: > > > > I like Relation or Rel, is shorter. > > On Mar 16, 2015 4:52 PM, "Hermann Gábor" <reckone...@gmail.com > <javascript:;><mailto:reckone...@gmail.com <javascript:;>>> wrote: > > > > +1 for DataTable > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org > <javascript:;><mailto:trohrm...@apache.org <javascript:;>>> > > wrote: > > > > +1 for DataTable > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Márton Balassi < > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com <javascript:;><mailto:balassi.mar...@gmail.com > <javascript:;>> > > > > wrote: > > > > +1 for Max's suggestion. > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Maximilian Michels < > > m...@apache.org <javascript:;><mailto:m...@apache.org <javascript:;>>> > > wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for starting the discussion. We should definitely not > > keep > > flink-expressions. > > > > I'm in favor of DataTable for the DataSet abstraction > > equivalent. > > For > > consistency, the package name should then be flink-table. At > > first > > sight, the name seems kind of plain but I think it is quite > > intuitive > > because the API enables you to work in a SQL like fashion. > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > I think this is a very good suggestion. :-) > > > > (There is an associated issue, we shouldn't forget to close: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1623) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
