Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Research how/if to expose ValueProvider APIs #696

Closed
ravwojdyla opened this issue Jun 22, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Research how/if to expose ValueProvider APIs #696

ravwojdyla opened this issue Jun 22, 2017 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@ravwojdyla
Copy link
Contributor

ravwojdyla commented Jun 22, 2017

Currently if a user wants to use ValueProvider APIs, the user needs to use Beam based API, and wrap those into custom* scio API. We should research if we want to expose ValueProvider API for some common use cases.

@jbx
Copy link
Contributor

jbx commented Aug 1, 2018

Review after 0.7.0 branch release

@BenFradet
Copy link
Contributor

👍 it'd make working with both scio and templates much more seamless. We might even be able to work on it.

@jtfell
Copy link

jtfell commented Nov 7, 2019

Hi @ravwojdyla @BenFradet , I'm interested in potentially implementing this. I'm pretty new to Beam and very new to Scio, so could you point in the right direction of how you would go about this?

Anything relating to API design, or even which files to look in to get started would be very helpful. Cheers.

@irvifa
Copy link

irvifa commented Sep 17, 2020

By the way I'm wondering if this is already implemented so we can use runtime value for templates? I notice there's an example for this on PR #1486

@regadas
Copy link
Contributor

regadas commented Sep 29, 2020

We believe that Flex Templates offers more flexibility and Google seems to be on the same page. For that reason we will not add Traditional Template support.

@regadas regadas closed this as completed Sep 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants