To me it is difficult to assess the various options without seeing a
proposal. If you feel strongly about it being a zookeeper sub-project,
I would suggest to write a proposal following the incubator guidelines
(http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html) and let the pmc
discuss and vote. If the zookeeper pmc does not accept it, then I'm
sure you can submit it pretty much verbatim to incubator.
If there is interest, there are lots of samples here:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/FrontPage
-Flavio
On Dec 6, 2011, at 3:11 AM, Camille Fournier wrote:
I'm sure there is. But I still stand behind the idea of this as an
incubator.
Personally, I am not comfortable endorsing this project as the
be-all-end-all zk client. I think we have to be truly comfortable
supporting it as such if we pull it in as part of our code base, no
matter how tangential we might keep it, and I for one am not on board
with that just yet. Maybe in a few months if we saw a significant
uptick in adoption by our user base, we could evaluate it as such. But
right now I think it's premature to take this code base on.
C
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]>
wrote:
IF we are talking analogies, there are SolR / Lucene, Mahout
Collections /
Mahout, PiggyBank / Pig that go the other way. You will be able to
add
many more as well, starting with Lucene / Hadoop and so on.
My thought is that it really has to do most with common development
interests. The projects that became TLP's had divergent
communities and
those that stuck together had more overlapping communities. In
this case,
I see lots of overlap because I have interests on both sides.
Other people
may care only about one side or the other, but I suspect that we
actually
have a spectrum rather than a dichotomy.
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Camille Fournier
<[email protected]> wrote:
I vote incubator. It seems to be to zookeeper as hector is to
cassandra.
From my phone
On Dec 5, 2011 7:13 PM, "Ted Dunning" <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <[email protected]
wrote:
On 12/5/11 3:29 PM, "Ted Dunning" <[email protected]> wrote:
Initially, n would be a very small number (possibly even 0, but
that
seems
unnecessary). The number could increase over time.
We'd want 1 (me) at minimum. 2 would be better as I have a
backup here
at
Netflix.
Let's see what the rest of the ZK world says.
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
