Hi Behrouz, I would create a new sub-task under the original issue that introduce the ParameterTool: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1525
Cheers, Max On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Behrouz Derakhshan <behrouz.derakhs...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Max, > > What you said makes sense, for "ParameterTool doesn't seem to support > positional arguments :) but we could fix that." should we create a separate > ticket or should it also be part of FLINK-2021 ? > > BR, > Behrouz > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi Behrouz, >> >> Thanks for starting the discussion. If I understand your question >> correctly, you are asking if it breaks the training or other external >> material if we convert the Flink examples to make use of the >> ParameterTool? >> >> We could make the changes such that the examples will accept the same >> parameters but use the ParameterTool internally to verify the >> parameters and print usage information. I think most examples simply >> use positional arguments and we could keep it that way. The only >> problem is that the ParameterTool doesn't seem to support positional >> arguments :) but we could fix that. >> >> Cheers, >> Max >> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Behrouz Derakhshan >> <behrouz.derakhs...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I had at look at this ticket FLINK-2021 >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2021>, there isn't much to >> do >> > from a technical stand point and it kinda makes sense to use the new >> > "ParameterTool", since it is being used in most of the other part of the >> > code base. >> > The only question is do we really want to do it, since I'm guessing some >> of >> > the training materials, slides and articles are referencing these >> examples >> > and updating those might be a burden. >> > >> > Let me know what you guys think, either I can start working on it or we >> can >> > just resolve it for good. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Behrouz >>
