One repo should be a given. Separate directories should be the question.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jason Altekruse <altekruseja...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that is a worthwhile discussion, parallel vs independent releases, > but I don't understand why it relates to one repo or not. Couldn't the > release tag names just include the language (cpp, java python)? What other > parts of version control are related to releasing? > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Julien Le Dem <jul...@dremio.com> wrote: > >> for the git repos it boils down to wether we want to release arrow-cpp >> and arrow-java independently or together with the same version numbers. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Wes, that's great! >>> On Dec 14, 2015 9:44 AM, "Wes McKinney" <w...@cloudera.com> wrote: >>> >>> > hi folks, >>> > >>> > In the interim I created a new public GitHub organization to host code >>> > for this effort so we can organize ourselves in advance of more >>> > progress in the ASF: >>> > >>> > https://github.com/arrow-data >>> > >>> > I have a partial C++ implementation of the Arrow spec that I can move >>> > there, along with a to-be-Markdown-ified version of a specification >>> > subject to more iteration. The more pressing short term matter will be >>> > making some progress on the metadata / data headers / IPC protocol >>> > (e.g. using Flatbuffers or the like). >>> > >>> > Thoughts on git repo structure? >>> > >>> > 1) Avro-style — "one repo to rule them all" >>> > 2) Parquet-style — arrow-format, arrow-cpp, arrow-java, etc. >>> > >>> > (I'm personally more in the latter camp, though integration tests may >>> > be more tedious that way) >>> > >>> > Thanks >>> > >>> > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> >>> wrote: >>> > > I've opened a name search for our top vote getter. >>> > > >>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-92 >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > I also just realized that my previously email dropped other >>> recipients. >>> > > Here it is below. >>> > > >>> > > ---- >>> > > I think we can call the voting closed. Top vote getters: >>> > > >>> > > Apache Arrow (17) >>> > > Apache Herringbone (9) >>> > > Apache Joist (8) >>> > > Apache Colbuf (8) >>> > > >>> > > I'll up a PODLINGNAMESEARCH-* shortly for Arrow. >>> > > >>> > > --- >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Jacques Nadeau >>> > > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Marcel Kornacker < >>> mar...@cloudera.com> >>> > > wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> Just added my vote. >>> > >> >>> > >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Wes McKinney <w...@cloudera.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >> > Shall we call the voting closed? Any last stragglers? >>> > >> > >>> > >> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Ted Dunning < >>> ted.dunn...@gmail.com> >>> > >> > wrote: >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> Apache can handle this if we set the groundwork in place. >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> Also, Twitter's lawyers work for Twitter, not for Apache. As >>> such, >>> > >> >> their >>> > >> >> opinions can't be taken by Apache as legal advice. There are >>> issues >>> > of >>> > >> >> privilege, conflict of interest and so on. >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Alex Levenson >>> > >> >> <alexleven...@twitter.com> >>> > >> >> wrote: >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> I can ask about whether Twitter's lawyers can help out -- is >>> that >>> > >> >>> something we need? Or is that something apache helps out with >>> in the >>> > >> >>> next >>> > >> >>> step? >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> +1 to have a vote tomorrow. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Assuming that Vector is out of play, I just did a quick search >>> for >>> > >> >>>> the >>> > >> >>>> top 4 remaining, (“arrow”, “honeycomb”, “herringbone”, >>> “joist"), at >>> > >> >>>> sourceforge, open hub, trademarkia, and on google. There are no >>> > >> >>>> trademarks >>> > >> >>>> for these in similar subject areas. There is a moderately >>> active >>> > >> >>>> project >>> > >> >>>> called “joist” [1]. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> I will point out that “Apache Arrow” has native-american >>> > connotations >>> > >> >>>> that we may or may not want to live with (just ask the >>> Washington >>> > >> >>>> Redskins >>> > >> >>>> how they feel about their name). >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> If someone would like to vet other names, use the links on >>> > >> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90, >>> and >>> > fill >>> > >> >>>> out >>> > >> >>>> column C in the spreadsheet. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Julian >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> [1] https://github.com/stephenh/joist >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jacques Nadeau < >>> jacq...@dremio.com> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> +1 >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> -- >>> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau >>> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Wes McKinney < >>> w...@cloudera.com> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Should we have a last call for votes, closing EOD tomorrow >>> > (Tuesday)? >>> > >> >>>> I >>> > >> >>>> missed this for a few days last week with holiday travel. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Julian Hyde < >>> > jul...@hydromatic.net> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Consulting a lawyer is part of the Apache branding process but >>> the >>> > >> >>>> first >>> > >> >>>> stage is to gather a list of potential conflicts - >>> > >> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90 is >>> an >>> > >> >>>> example. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> The other part, frankly, is to pick your battles. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> A year or so ago Actian re-branded Vectorwise as Vector. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >>> http://www.zdnet.com/article/actian-consolidates-its-analytics-portfolio/ >>> . >>> > >> >>>> Given that it is an analytic database in the Hadoop space I >>> think >>> > >> >>>> that is >>> > >> >>>> as close to a “direct hit” as it gets. I don’t think we need a >>> > lawyer >>> > >> >>>> to >>> > >> >>>> tell us that. Certainly it makes sense to look for conflicts >>> for >>> > the >>> > >> >>>> other >>> > >> >>>> alternatives before consulting lawyers. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Julian >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 9:42 PM, Marcel Kornacker < >>> mar...@cloudera.com >>> > > >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jacques Nadeau < >>> > jacq...@dremio.com> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Ok guys, >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> I don't think anyone is doing a thorough analysis of >>> viaability. I >>> > >> >>>> did a >>> > >> >>>> quick glance and the top one (Vector) seems like it would have >>> an >>> > >> >>>> issue >>> > >> >>>> with conflict of an Actian product. The may be fine. Let's do a >>> > >> >>>> second >>> > >> >>>> phase vote. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> I'm assuming you mean Vectorwise? >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Before we do anything else, could we have a lawyer look into >>> this? >>> > >> >>>> Last >>> > >> >>>> time around that I remember (Parquet), Twitter's lawyers did a >>> good >>> > >> >>>> job >>> > >> >>>> of >>> > >> >>>> weeding out the potential trademark violations. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Alex, could Twitter get involved this time around as well? >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Pick your top 3 (1,2,3 with 3 being top preference) >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Let's get this done by Friday and then we can do a podling name >>> > >> >>>> search >>> > >> >>>> starting with the top one. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Link again: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532&vpid=A1 >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> thanks >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> -- >>> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau >>> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Jacques Nadeau < >>> > jacq...@dremio.com> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Ok, it looks like we have a candidate list (we actually got 11 >>> > since >>> > >> >>>> there was a three-way tie for ninth place): >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> VectorArrowhoneycombHerringbonejoistV2Pietcolbufbatonimpulsevictor >>> > >> >>>> Next we need to do trademark searches on each of these to see >>> > whether >>> > >> >>>> we're likely to have success. I've moved candidates to a second >>> > tab: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532 >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Anybody want to give a hand in analyzing potential conflicts? >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> -- >>> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau >>> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Jacques Nadeau < >>> > jacq...@dremio.com> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Everybody should pick their ten favorites using the numbers 1 >>> to >>> > 10. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> 10 is most preferred >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> -- >>> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau >>> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Ted Dunning < >>> > ted.dunn...@gmail.com> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Single vote for most preferred? >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Single transferable vote? >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Jacques Nadeau < >>> > jacq...@dremio.com> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Given that a bunch of people added names to the sheet, I'll >>> take >>> > >> >>>> that as tacit agreement to the proposed process. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Let's move to the first vote phase. I've added a column for >>> > >> >>>> everybody's votes. Let's try to wrap up the vote by 10am on >>> > >> >>>> Wednesday. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> thanks! >>> > >> >>>> Jacques >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> -- >>> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau >>> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jacques Nadeau < >>> > jacq...@apache.org >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Hey Guys, >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> It sounds like we need to do a little more work on the Vector >>> > >> >>>> proposal >>> > >> >>>> before the board would like to consider it. The main point of >>> > >> >>>> contention >>> > >> >>>> right now is the name of the project. We need to decide on a >>> name >>> > >> >>>> and get >>> > >> >>>> it signed off through PODLINGNAMESEARCH. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Naming is extremely subjective so I'd like to propose a >>> process for >>> > >> >>>> selection that minimizes pain. This is an initial proposal and >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> We do the naming in the following steps >>> > >> >>>> - 1: Collect a set of names to be considered >>> > >> >>>> - 2: Run a vote for 2 days where each member ranks their top 10 >>> > >> >>>> options >>> > >> >>>> 1..10 >>> > >> >>>> - 3: Take the top ten vote getters and do a basic analysis of >>> > >> >>>> whether we >>> > >> >>>> think that any have legal issues. Keep dropping names that have >>> > >> >>>> this until >>> > >> >>>> we get with 10 reasonably solid candidate names >>> > >> >>>> - 5: Take the top ten names and give people 48 hours to rank >>> their >>> > >> >>>> top 3 >>> > >> >>>> names >>> > >> >>>> - 6: Start a PODLINGNAMESEARCH on the top rank one, if that >>> doesn't >>> > >> >>>> work, >>> > >> >>>> try the second and third options. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> I suggest we take name suggestions for step 1 from everyone but >>> > then >>> > >> >>>> constrain the voting to the newly proposed project [1]. We >>> could >>> > >> >>>> just do >>> > >> >>>> this in a private email thread but I think doing it on Drill >>> dev is >>> > >> >>>> better >>> > >> >>>> in the interest of transparency. This isn't the perfect place >>> for >>> > >> >>>> that but >>> > >> >>>> I'm not sure a better place exists. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> I'm up for changing any or all of this depending on what others >>> > >> >>>> think. Just >>> > >> >>>> wanted to get the ball rolling on a proposed process. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> If this works, I've posted a doc at [2] that we can use for >>> step 1. >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> Thanks, >>> > >> >>>> Jacques >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> [1] List of proposed new project members/voters: Todd Lipcon, >>> Ted >>> > >> >>>> Dunning, >>> > >> >>>> Michael Stack, P. Taylor Goetz, Julian Hyde, Julien Le Dem, >>> Jacques >>> > >> >>>> Nadeau, >>> > >> >>>> James Taylor, Jake Luciani, Parth Chandra, Alex Levenson, >>> Marcel >>> > >> >>>> Kornacker, >>> > >> >>>> Steven Phillips, Hanifi Gunes, Wes McKinney, Jason Altekruse, >>> David >>> > >> >>>> Alves, >>> > >> >>>> Zain Asgar, Ippokratis Pandis, Abdel Hakim Deneche, Reynold >>> Xin. >>> > >> >>>> [2] >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=0 >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> -- >>> > >> >>> Alex Levenson >>> > >> >>> @THISWILLWORK >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Julien >> > >
