Thanks a lot, Matthias! I created an actual "FLIP-Template" based on the template you copied over.
I propose to change the list of public interfaces to this: All of the following are public interfaces that people build around: - DataStream and DataSet API, including classes related to that, such as StreamExecutionEnvironment - Classes marked with the @Public annotation - On-disk binary formats, such as checkpoints/savepoints - Configuration - Monitoring Cheers, Aljoscha On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 at 13:49 Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > Done. > > I replaced KIP -> FLIP and Kafka -> Flink. Still there are some things > we need to rework. Please have a look and propose changes. > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals > > Same for FLIP Template > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP+Template > > > -Matthias > > On 07/08/2016 09:56 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > > Hi, > > I got this reply from one of the Kafka committers: > > > > Thanks for sharing your intention to use a process similar to our KIP > > > > process. You are more than welcome to copy the structures and docs that > we > > > > have for the KIP process. :) > > > > Ismael > > > > > > So it seems we're good to go. @Matthias, since you are a Kafka > contributor, > > could you maybe copy the relevant docs from the Kafka wiki to our wiki? > The > > source for this page: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Improvement+Proposals > > and > > the KIP template that is referenced there. If you want, I can take it > from > > there and adapt it to Flink and then let everyone discuss it again. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Aljoscha > > > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 at 11:38 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > >> I'll reach out to the Kafka community and ask if it's ok for us to > "steal" > >> their process for this. > >> > >> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 at 11:36 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > >>> @Matthias: Yes, this is the reason why I like the KIP process and why I > >>> said "The problem with these is that a) the comments on the Google > Docs are > >>> not reflected in Jira and the mailing list. There has been some very > active > >>> discussion on some of the docs that most people would never notice.". > >>> > >>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 at 11:28 Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> I also like the proposal. I think its an issue that Google Docs > comments > >>>> are not reflected within ASF infra. Therefore, I'm +1 on discussing > the > >>>> proposals on the mailing list. > >>>> > >>>> I agree that we need to clean up our wiki. > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Just to point out one thing about Kafka KIPs and using the project > >>>> wiki: > >>>>> > >>>>> The wiki contains the current state of the proposal, while the > >>>>> discussion is covered over the dev-mailing list. IMHO, this makes a > lot > >>>>> of sense, as people tend to follow the mailing list but not wiki > >>>>> changes. Furthermore, the mailing list tracks the whole discussion > >>>>> history, while the proposal is kept in a clean state and thus easy to > >>>> read. > >>>>> > >>>>> -Matthias > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 07/06/2016 10:09 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > >>>>>> Jip, that's why I referenced the Kafka process which is also in > their > >>>>> wiki. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 at 21:01 Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Yes, big +1 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I had actually talked about the same thing with some people as > well. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I am currently sketching a few FLIPs for things, like improvements > >>>> to > >>>>> the > >>>>>>> Yarn/Mesos/Kubernetes integration > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> One thing we should do here is to actually structure the wiki a bit > >>>> to > >>>>> make > >>>>>>> it easier to find information and proposals. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hey Aljoscha, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> thanks for this proposal. I've somehow missed it last week. I like > >>>> the > >>>>>>>> idea very much and agree with your assessment about the problems > >>>> with > >>>>>>>> the Google Doc approach. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regarding the process: I'm also in favour of adopting it from > >>>> Kafka. I > >>>>>>>> would not expect any problems with this, but we can post a quick > >>>> note > >>>>>>>> to their ML. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> @Matthias: The name works for me. ;-) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> – Ufuk > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Matthias J. Sax < > >>>> mj...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> FLIP ?? Really? :D > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.maya.tv/en/character/flip > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -Matthias > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On 06/28/2016 06:26 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> I'm proposing to add a formal process for how we deal with > >>>> (major) > >>>>>>>>>> improvements to Flink and design docs. This has been mentioned > >>>>> several > >>>>>>>>>> times recently but we never took any decisive action to actually > >>>>>>>> implement > >>>>>>>>>> such a process so here we go. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Right now, we have Jira issues and we sometimes we have design > >>>> docs > >>>>>>>> that we > >>>>>>>>>> keep in Google Docs. Jamie recently added links to those that he > >>>>> could > >>>>>>>> find > >>>>>>>>>> on the mailing list to the Flink wiki: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Home. > >>>>>>>> The > >>>>>>>>>> problem with these is that a) the comments on the Google Docs > >>>> are not > >>>>>>>>>> reflected in Jira and the mailing list. There has been some very > >>>>>>> active > >>>>>>>>>> discussion on some of the docs that most people would never > >>>> notice. > >>>>>>> The > >>>>>>>>>> community therefore might seem less active than it actually is. > >>>> b) > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>> documents are not very discoverable, if we had a clearly defined > >>>>> place > >>>>>>>>>> where we put them and also prominently link to this on the Flink > >>>>>>>> homepage > >>>>>>>>>> this would greatly help people that try to find out about > current > >>>>>>>>>> developments. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Kafka has a process like this: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Improvement+Proposals > >>>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>> They call it KIP, for Kafka Improvement Proposal. We could > either > >>>>>>> adapt > >>>>>>>>>> this for Flink or come up with our own process. Doing the former > >>>>> would > >>>>>>>> save > >>>>>>>>>> us a lot of time and I don't think the Kafka community would > >>>> mind us > >>>>>>>>>> copying their process. The subject also hints at this, our > >>>> process > >>>>>>>> could be > >>>>>>>>>> called FLIP, for Flink Improvement Proposal. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> What do you think? Feedback is highly welcome. :-) > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>> Aljoscha > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > > > >
