On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 11:19PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > Hi Eli, > > On Aug 29, 2012, at 11:41 AM, Eli Collins wrote: > > > Thanks for writing up a proposal Chris. > > NP. > > > > > I think it makes sense to have Common live in HDFS at least for now, > > since it's at the bottom of the stack / dependency chain and it's code > > is the most intertwined with common, and, per Arun, we tend to work on > > common stuff more than MR people. The HDFS project is really a lot > > more than HDFS, eg has all the hadoop commands, non-HDFS file system > > source, etc but that seems like an OK starting point. We need to > > figure out the committers and PMC though since the goal is to just > > have the HDFS community (vs the current Hadoop people) but the project > > will contain non-HDFS stuff. I'd like to hear from the current Hadoop > > committers and PMC members that mostly work on MR and YARN - are you > > guys OK losing your current privileges on the HDFS repo? > > Rather than ask the former question that way, I would just simply put up > a list of proposed HDFS PMC folks (yes, I keep using PMC ^_^). Then, > iterate on that. > > > Otherwise we > > haven't made much progress (ie HDFS still has multiple communities). > > ACK. > > > > > We also need to address the areas where it's not so cut and dry, eg > > where there is a single Hadoop project: > > - The Hadoop trademark, assume this lives in the HDFS project if Common > > does? > > Apache owns the Hadoop trademark, and the PMC helps to enforce it. Projects > don't own trademarks. > > > - The user community, eg the users lists that we *just* merged, shall > > we still keep one list? > > That's a good question -- maybe ask users to opt-in. Yes, this is intrusive, > but > I bet you'd find the real users of the specific projects if they have to > resubscribe. > Just my 2c. > > > - We should move the global stuff like "how to get started" docs to > > Bigtop, which can point to individual projects resources > > Sounds cool to me. > > > - Hadoop 1.x is is maintenance mode, though it still actively gets > > patches so we need to consider it. The surgery necessary to split v1 > > Hadoop is probably not suitable for a sustaining release and not worth > > it at this point in the lifetime of this branch. I assume the HDFS > > project will then host the Hadoop 1.x branches? This implies only > > members of the HDFS project can commit and release. > > Why not put the 1.x stuff in Bigtop since it's global or whatever?
Wearing my BigTop hat now, I encourage this audience to rush something like this to BigTop. If I am reading you correctly, you are asking BigTop to host 1.x branches of Hadoop, aren't you? I don't see how it fits in there, actually. But this is a separate issue that needs to involve BigTop community. Cos > Cheers, > Chris > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. > Senior Computer Scientist > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA > Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 > Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >
