I agree taking a dependency on Hadoop Common wouldn't be ideal for some HTrace users who haven't already done so. I don't even know if Hadoop would be interested. However if they are I would hope we don't forclose on the idea only to see HTrace go to the attic instead.
> On Mar 15, 2018, at 7:45 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > > I share Colin's reservations about it being a subproject of Accumulo. I > think that is only worth considering because of HTrace's past, but not > necessarily for its future. > > I'm hesitant to agree it should be merged into Hadoop Common. Hadoop is > already so big... and personally, I would like to see it split up into a > few projects (not necessarily under different PMC, but certainly with > independent builds, releases, and separate focus areas: YARN and HDFS for > example really should be separate, IMO). If HTrace got merged into Hadoop > Common in Hadoop's current state, I think it would only make it harder for > people to identify where the separation between components is and how to > contribute. As a downstream packager helping maintain Hadoop and HTrace for > Fedora, I already find this amalgamation of all the different components of > Hadoop into a single project a nightmare task; throwing in HTrace to the > mix could make the situation even worse for packagers and other downstream > users of Hadoop and/or HTrace. > > There's also a risk that Hadoop's size and level of activity could be > overwhelming, and a deterrent to contributors who just want to help out > with HTrace occasionally. > > I also wouldn't want to force a dependency on the larger Hadoop libraries, > to get tracing instrumention from HTrace into one's own non-Hadoop project. > (This could be a problem if HTrace code were shipped in existing Hadoop > Common jars or was tightly coupled with them.) > > If, on the other hand, HTrace became the responsibility of the Hadoop PMC > as a subproject, but with its own repo/lists/releases, I think that could > be a very good thing. Hadoop could host a small sub-community of HTrace > without that sub-community being necessarily overwhelmed by the rest of > Hadoop's heavy activity. > > I don't know anything about Skywalking, so I don't have anything to add to > that idea. > > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 4:29 PM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I think it would make a lot of sense if merged into Hadoop Common. HBase >> and Phoenix at least would have a trivial migration, and already depend on >> Hadoop Common for many other things. This would prolong the life of HTrace >> API usage in those projects, perhaps indefinitely. >> >> >>> On Mar 15, 2018, at 12:52 PM, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> I would potentially be interested in continue to be involved with HTrace >> as a subproject. >>> >>> The vision behind HTrace was always to have a single trace system that >> unified all of Hadoop. So you could see what Accumulo was doing and how >> that affected HDFS, or what Phoenix was doing that affected HBase and HDFS, >> etc. etc. This has sort of been built several times internally by >> companies running services based on Hadoopy projects, but never really made >> its way into open source in a meaningful way. I thought we had a good shot >> at that, but maybe we needed to start earlier and have more resources. We >> especially lacked full-time developers and people to evangelize the client. >>> >>> I think it makes the most sense for HTrace to be a subproject of either >> Apache Hadoop or Apache Skywalking. Skywalking in particular seems >> interesting since its goals are very similar to HTrace's -- to be a >> one-stop shop including tracing clients, visualization, and storage. >> Perhaps HTraced could be useful to them for improving that "first 15 minute >> experience". It's easy to start up and doesn't require managing a separate >> storage or query system. >>> >>> I'm not so sure about HTrace being a subproject of Accumulo. It seems >> like Accumulo is really focused on being a storage system, not so much on >> being a platform. It would be weird for HBase or HDFS to depend on >> something that was a subproject of Accumulo, for example. >>> >>> best, >>> Colin >>> >>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018, at 17:35, Michael Wall wrote: >>>> I am interested. I am not thinking about it as subproject under >> Accumulo >>>> though, just to be clear. Just looked at Skywalking for the first time, >>>> seems intriguing. >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:32 PM Mike Drob <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018, 2:26 PM Billie Rinaldi <billie.rina...@gmail.com >>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In the active thread "[VOTE] Retire HTrace from Incubation" >> Christopher >>>>>> Tubbs brought up the idea to make HTrace a subproject of an existing >> TLP. >>>>> >>>>> This would mitigate the issues of the community being inactive and the >> core >>>>>> instrumentation library not requiring ongoing development. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Does moving to a subproject out another tlp necessitate changing Java >>>>> package names prior to release? That would put a damper on user >> adoption >>>>> again. >>>>> >>>>> It's a choice we could make now (assuming we were able to find a TLP >>>>>> willing to adopt HTrace >>>>> >>>>> as a subproject), >>>>> >>>>> The Skywalking podling expressed some interest in the vote thread. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> or we could allow HTrace to retire and then revisit the >>>>>> subproject idea at a future time if someone becomes interested in >>>>> patching >>>>>> and releasing a new version of HTrace. >>>>>> >>>>>> So far, the people who have expressed interest in being involved with >>>>>> HTrace as a possible subproject are Christopher, Masatake, and >> myself. Is >>>>>> anyone else in the community interested in this idea? >>>>>> >>>>> >>
