Makes perfect sense, Stephan, as long as there is a separate folder for each (stating the obvious :) ). +1
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > Quick question: Should we actually create a single "flink-examples" > project, where we put all examples (batch, streaming, gelly) both Java and > Scala? > > Would help us reduce the plethora of maven projects a bit ;-) > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Andra Lungu <lungu.an...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Vasia, > > > > We should document the examples in the Gelly guide, I totally agree, > > perhaps something similar to what Giraph offers. > > However, if you recall, the examples are also there for test purposes. > The > > library methods contain just the run method; no main method. For the > tests, > > the nicest way to do this is to call a main class... The way I see it, > > there is no reason to refactor something that works and that does not > > bother anyone. This is clearly not a bug! > > > > How about we focus on adding more interesting features like, for > instance, > > graph partitioning and keep refactoring of the examples (changes of > names, > > etc) for some other time? > > > > Cheers, > > Andra > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Sounds very good, thanks Vasia! > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Sounds reasonable to me. +1 > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Vasiliki Kalavri < > > > > vasilikikala...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello squirrels, > > > > > > > > > > adding Gelly examples has been a great way to let in new > contributors > > > and > > > > > we have had quite a big number of contributions! > > > > > However, I think it's about time we re-organize and clean them up a > > > bit. > > > > > > > > > > We currently have 13 examples. > > > > > > > > > > - 5 examples simply use vertex-centric library methods, i.e. they > are > > > > > almost identical and the only method they demonstrate is > > graph.run(new > > > > > LibraryAlgorithm()). > > > > > > > > > > I think it's enough if we keep 1 of those. Another problem is that > > the > > > > > implementations of these methods are "hidden" inside the library > > > > methods. I > > > > > propose we turn 1 of the 5 examples into showing how to use > > > > vertex-centric > > > > > iterations. > > > > > > > > > > - 3 examples show how to use the GSA iteration. We can also keep 1, > > > e.g. > > > > > SSSP. > > > > > The other 2 can be moved to the library. > > > > > > > > > > - I think the rest of the examples have a purpose and show how to > use > > > > > different Gelly methods: > > > > > > > > > > 1. EuclideanGraphWeighing: use of triplets > > > > > 2. GraphMetrics: use of metrics and statistics methods > > > > > 3. IncrementalSSSP: use of message direction in iterations > > > > > 4. JaccardSimilarity: use of neighborhood methods and joins > > > > > 5. MusicProfiles: how to mix Gelly with the DataSet API > > > > > > > > > > To sum up, I propose we keep the above 5 examples, plus 1 to show > how > > > to > > > > > use library methods, 1 for vertex-centric and 1 for GSA -> total 8 > > and > > > > move > > > > > the redundant GSA implementations to the library. > > > > > > > > > > I believe we should also improve the examples documentation and > refer > > > to > > > > > the functionality that each of them demonstrates. > > > > > > > > > > What do you think about this? If you agree, I will create a JIRA > and > > do > > > > it! > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Vasia. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
