On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: >>> Note that API is not just method signatures but includes all aspects >>> of implementation such as class hierarchies, type compatibility, >>> static and non-static state etc. >> >> I think that it's good to have binary compatibility with Cloudera's old >> bindings. I still don't see why it's a requirement for Apache to house >> code whose sole use is to provide backward compatible bindings for >> Cloudera's old bindings. > > The Sqoop community moved from github where it was ASL licensed to > Apache. There is now a Sqoop community at Apache that continues > using/developing this code and they felt that having backward > compatibility was useful. There is no stated restriction from Apache > against doing such. I don't know the cost of just dropping the > com.cloudera migration aids, but I suspect it would have been easier > to just drop it than spend the time worrying about it and trying to > provide a solution. I'm primarily acting as a mentor, Arvind would be > in better position to provide insight into that background and why the > community felt it was important to carry this forward.
Thanks Patrick. You are absolutely right in stating that it would have been easier for us to drop any backward compatibility requirements and get releases out quickly. The reason we chose to invest a lot in preserving backward compatibility is for our community. Sqoop has an active community that we care deeply about and we have done our best to make sure continues to use Sqoop effectively. It is this thriving community that was the primary reason for Sqoop to have come into the incubator in the first place. One thing I want to clarify is that any insinuation that com.cloudera.* packages exist in Sqoop is to somehow help Cloudera and it's customers couldn't be farther from the truth. The fact is that Cloudera will continue to provide support for Sqoop with backward compatibility regardless of whether the com.cloudera.* namespace is retained or removed from Sqoop. If we decided to remove these packages, it is the community that will suffer, not Cloudera. I do believe that if this is only an Incubator policy and not an Apache policy, it will be tantamount to discrimination against the Sqoop community more than anything else. To say that JSR specs are not the same as old Cloudera code, gives me the impression that some communities have more power on how Apache implements its policies for larger communities than on smaller communities. If that is indeed the case, it will help to state that explicitly. Thanks, Arvind Prabhakar > > Patrick > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
