_Please Consider This Vote Thread Closed_ As chair, I feel confident that a [VOTE] was not the right step to take at this time. Ongoing _discussion_ is entirely on point. I do not think that it is appropriate to tally this thread and declare a result. I am going to reply to this thread changing the subject to [DISCUSS], and we'll see what we have in the way of a consensus.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Let me rephrase the question. Could the actual reason behind Chukwa > retirement be related to the fact, that there exist Flume and Kafka > which gives users same opportunites to manage distributed systems? I > better understand this before trying to spread the word about joinging > Chukwa community. > > If this is the case, could it be that there are ways to mergre > projects somehow, e.g. provide Chukwa API on the top of Flume or > Kafka? > > -- > With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, > Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, > http://dataved.ru/ > +7 916 562 8095 > > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Alexei Fedotov > <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello guys, >> I want to understand Chukwa community building strategy better. Are >> there any insights why companies which use Hadoop (in Moscow those >> include Deutche Bank, Yandex, Rambler and Microsoft) do not crowd >> around or stay in line to get a chance to use Chukwa? >> >> -- >> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, >> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, >> http://dataved.ru/ >> +7 916 562 8095 >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:55 PM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Benson Margulies >>> <bimargul...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> One interesting point about consensus decision-making process is the >>>> need to define the starting point. The process assumes that there is a >>>> clear 'status quo', and that a consensus is required to change it. >>>> This may not always be the appropriate way to think about retiring a >>>> podling, but it's clearly the way we're thinking about this one. >>>> >>>> Does anyone else feel that this could have benefitted from a [DISCUSS] >>>> before the [VOTE]. >>>> >>>> At the bottom line, if there are new mentors to be fully responsible, >>>> I think it's reasonable to continue; however, I don't want to have >>>> exactly the same conversation in N months. Would the new mentors like >>>> to propose a time limit, and is the group willing to subscribe to the >>>> notion that, if after that time, the new mentors have the same report >>>> as the old mentors, we're at the end? >>>> >>>> >>> Could we maybe include a time limit next month with the credible plan to >>> give new mentors a little time to get up to speed with the project? >>> >>> ...ant > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
