> From: Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]>
> And, isn't this 'competition' already happening between all the BT and Dynamo 
> implementations?

Yes there is, and there is clearly major architectural and implementation 
differences that make it worthwhile to promote such competition. Nobody 
disputes (that I know of) that one of BT or Dynamo is not going to be a good 
fit for use case X, but will be for use case Y, and so on.

>From what I have heard -- and of course we are fumbling around in the dark a 
>bit here waiting for secret code yet to be released -- there is much less 
>distinction here between the code base proposed for incubation and HBase. I 
>hear a rumor it borrows some HBase code directly.


> I fail to see anything bad happening here.

See below...


> are you saying that the proposal is actually some kind of HBase fork?


This question can be answered by a detailed review of both code bases side by 
side.

Let us call this a concern, not an assertion that anything bad is happening 
here. I at least do not have enough information on hand to say one way or 
another.

Best regards,


   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via 
Tom White)


>________________________________
>From: Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]>
>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; Andrew Purtell 
><[email protected]>
>Sent: Saturday, September 3, 2011 3:00 PM
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Accumulo, another BigTable clone, has shown up on 
>Apache Incubator as a proposal
>
>
>
>
>On Saturday, September 3, 2011, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I'm simply pointing out a lack of community involvement to date.
>>
>>
>> I would only add to this that the incubation proposal makes a controversial 
>> statement regarding existing involvement with the HBase community. It may be 
>> technically true if a certain company with involvement in HBase has also 
>> been interacting with "Accumulo", but is disingenuous to claim that the 
>> "community" has been involved here.
>>
>> It looks like strictly a one way street: They have been able to observe or 
>> borrow the fruits of our labor for years, and now at a suitable point wish 
>> to incubate at the ASF to compete with our project for community. That is 
>> not "community involvement". That is leeching.
>
>are you saying that the proposal is actually some kind of HBase fork?
>
>And, isn't this 'competition' already happening between all the BT and Dynamo 
>implementations?
>
>I fail to see anything bad happening here.
>
> Bernd 
>
> 

Reply via email to