I guess what I meant is: separate repos => separate releases. One repo can still have separate releases as was mentioned.
I’m not too fond of the separate repos in parquet anymore. The only reason I would split to a separate repo now is if we have large files for regression testing and that’s because of how git works. Separate directories java and cpp seems a given since they will build independently. I’d vote for just one repo with /format /java /cpp. both /java and /cpp depend on /format releasing the format independently is useful because the semantics are different than for an API. A breaking change in the format may not be an API change and vice-versa. Julien > On Dec 16, 2015, at 7:03 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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 > <mailto: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 > <mailto: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 > <mailto:jacq...@dremio.com>> wrote: > Thanks Wes, that's great! > On Dec 14, 2015 9:44 AM, "Wes McKinney" <w...@cloudera.com > <mailto: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 <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 > > <mailto:jacq...@dremio.com>> wrote: > > > I've opened a name search for our top vote getter. > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-92 > > > <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 > > > <mailto:mar...@cloudera.com>> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Just added my vote. > > >> > > >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Wes McKinney <w...@cloudera.com > > >> <mailto: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 > > >> > <mailto: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 <mailto: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 > > >> >>> <mailto: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 > > >> >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90>, and > > fill > > >> >>>> out > > >> >>>> column C in the spreadsheet. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> Julian > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> [1] https://github.com/stephenh/joist > > >> >>>> <https://github.com/stephenh/joist> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com > > >> >>>> <mailto: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 > > >> >>>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 > > >> >>>> <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/ > > <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 > > >> >>>> <mailto:mar...@cloudera.com> > > > > > >> >>>> wrote: > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jacques Nadeau < > > jacq...@dremio.com <mailto: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 > > > > <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 <mailto: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 > > > > <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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 > > > > <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=0> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> -- > > >> >>> Alex Levenson > > >> >>> @THISWILLWORK > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Julien > >