| I tend to agree that we should do one at a time, and it is fine with me to have bookkeeper going out first.
On the discussion of Incubator vs. ZK sub-project, I don't see much different except for the PMC. If I understand the incubator scheme correctly, they have one PMC responsible for the oversight of incubator projects. Since we know the ZooKeeper PMC well and some of us are actually members of it, it seems more natural to me to stick with the ZK PMC instead of moving to a different PMC. Consequently, my current preference is ZK sub-project. Pat also pointed out that the ZK umbrella is broad enough to accommodate BK/Hedwig according to the Apache board resolution that established the project. -Flavio On Mar 16, 2011, at 11:14 AM, Ivan Kelly wrote: I agree about the separation of bookkeeper and hedwig. They solve very different problems, so lumping them together feels clunky. Perhaps bookkeeper could be moved out of zookeeper first, leaving hedwig in until there's more community interest in it. -Ivan On 15 Mar 2011, at 23:58, Dhruba Borthakur wrote: I am interested in contributing to the bookkeeper code. It would be nice to
have a community around it. An incubator proposal sounds good, but the
zk-subproject should also work well. It woud be nice to separate out hedwig
and bookkeeper since they have quite different functionality.
-dhruba
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Mahadev Konar <[email protected]> wrote:
I like the idea of BookKeeper/Hedwig being subprojects.
thanks
mahadev
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:34 AM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Flavio Junqueira <[email protected]
wrote:
I'm sorry for not replying before. I didn't feel that the message was
for
me, since it should be pretty obvious that I'm interested in those
projects. Here are some thoughts, though:
- It would be really nice to have committers for bookkeeper/hedwig;
- It would be really nice to have independent releases for
bookkeeper/hedwig;
- It sounds like bookkeeper and hedwig don't always go together, and
hdfs
is an instance in which it happens. But, hedwig builds on top of
bookkeeper
(and other components), so using hedwig implies using bookkeeper.
Consequently, if we choose only one to be a main project, perhaps
bookkeeper
would be a better choice;
Perhaps one could argue that bk/hedwig fall under "distributed system
coordination" and therefore should be part of ZK? Or is that too much of
a
stretch? ;-)
RESOLVED, that the Apache ZooKeeper Project be and hereby is responsible
for the creation and maintenance of software related to distributed
system
coordination; and be it further
- I don't think we have anyone who could be a project lead for these
projects right now, so it could be a problem to split up at this point.
For
this reason, a zookeeper subproject sounds like a better option compared
to
incubator, unless we are able to find a project lead.
-Flavio
On Mar 2, 2011, at 6:55 PM, Benjamin Reed wrote:
i wanted to start a discussion about making hedwig and bookkeeper a
subproject. (actually pat started the discussion last month in general
about all of the contrib projects.) there are three questions, in my
mind, that we need to answer to move forward:
1) should it be a hedwig/bookkeeper subproject, or should there be two
separate projects? we need to build a developer community and i'm
wondering if we should try to build a single dev community or two. the
relationship is a bit asymmetrical: hedwig depends on bookkeeper, but
not visa-versa. i'm inclined to say we do a hedwig subproject and
include bookkeeper with it, but i don't feel strongly.
2) should we propose a subproject to zookeeper or to incubator? i'm a
bit more inclined to propose a zookeeper subproject simply because it
fits well with the zookeeper community, but it does introduce a bit
more overhead to the zookeeper PMC.
3) do we have the developer interest to make it happen in the first
place? i know we can get at least 3 initial committers from yahoo!,
but projects should be represented by multiple companies. (the goal is
at least 3.) so, is there interest in working on the project from
others?
please comment. these are all open issues, so opinions are what i'm
looking for. if there isn't much discussion, i think that will
implicitly answer 3 :)
thanx
ben
*flavio*
*junqueira*
research scientist
[email protected]
direct +34 93-183-8828
avinguda diagonal 177, 8th floor, barcelona, 08018, es
phone (408) 349 3300 fax (408) 349 3301
--
Connect to me at http://www.facebook.com/dhruba
flaviojunqueira research scientist [email protected]direct +34 93-183-8828 avinguda diagonal 177, 8th floor, barcelona, 08018, esphone (408) 349 3300 fax (408) 349 3301
 |
