Re: Trademarks and Derivative Works
On Jun 16, 2011, at 12:22 PM, Segel, Mike wrote: > Unfortunately what you're saying is that you would only approve of companies > that build their products on top of Apache's release and doesn't modify the > Apache release. No, that isn't what I'm saying. I'm saying that if they want to call what they are shipping Hadoop, it has to be an Apache release. Derived works may be "powered by Hadoop." Please see the original proposal here: http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Defining%20Hadoop > This interpretation of "powered by Hadoop" would unfortunately lead to as > many problems as it attempts to solve. > First, many choose Cloudera's release because they sell commercial support. > So in choosing Cloudera's release, they would lose the ability to say > "powered by Hadoop". > This diminishes the branding message. No, you misread the proposal. They *would* be able to say their product was "powered by Hadoop". What would be prohibited would be calling a derivative work "Hadoop." > (I'm not forgetting about Yahoo!, but are they releasing their own version > as well?) Not for the last year. > I hope that you start to see the dangers on taking a narrow approach in how > you define Hadoop. I'm trying to learn. -- Owen
Re: [RESULT] Powered by Logo
I independently counted all of the votes as well and came to the same conclusions that Owen did. Even considering those who voted with a different subject line, the outcome was indeed the same. Thanks to all who participated! -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > Ok, >I collated the votes filtering on the subject line. I know that method > missed some of the non-binding votes, but I don't believe it changed the > outcome. > > With the binding votes from the PMC: > > > > First Round 2 4 4 4 5 6 6 1Second Round (Drop 6) 2 5 4 4 5 6 > Third > Round (Drop 4) 2 8 5 7 > > So in the very close race, #2 wins. My spreadsheets, which are attached > below, show the counted votes. > > With all of the binding and non-binding votes: > > > > First Round 1 1 2 13 4 23 5 27 6 4Second Round(Drop 1) 2 13 4 > 23 5 27 6 5Third Round (Drop 6) 2 15 4 24 5 29Forth Round > (Drop 2) 4 35 5 31 > > -- Owen > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Shall we adopt the "Defining Hadoop" page
On Jun 14, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > All, >Steve Loughran has done some great work on defining what can be called > Hadoop at http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Defining%20Hadoop. After some cleanup > from Noirin and Shane, I think we've got a really good base. I'd like a vote > to approve the content (at the current revision 12) and put the content on > our web site. Binding +1: Arun, Chris, Ian, Owen Binding -1: Doug, Eli, Todd Non-binding +1: Allen, Cos, Matt, Steve Non-binding -1: Ted, Jeff Well, technically this passed, but we've been encouraged to discuss it more. Personally, I'd love to get more feedback from Larry about how we should accomplish the goal of getting packagers to either use Apache Hadoop releases or only use "powered by Hadoop." Clearly there is a significant difference of opinion about the value of that goal that is unlikely to be resolved by debate. Having a clearly stated trademark statement on the website will help significantly with contacting organizations that are mis-using the trademark, so I don't want to postpone this too long. Let's discuss it for a week and then call a new vote if we think that is merited. -- Owen
Re: [VOTE] Shall we adopt the "Defining Hadoop" page
On 06/24/2011 10:26 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > Having a clearly stated trademark statement on the website will help > significantly with contacting organizations that are mis-using the > trademark, so I don't want to postpone this too long. Let's discuss > it for a week and then call a new vote if we think that is merited. Might it be better to improve the existing Apache trademark policy page? http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/ This way all projects can benefit, e.g., Pig, Hive, Zookeeper, etc. We might, e.g., propose more examples of acceptable and not-acceptable uses of Apache marks there, etc. We can work with trademarks@ to build a library of boilerplate letters to be sent to folks whose use Apache marks in objectionable ways. Doug
Re: [RESULT] Powered by Logo
So there is a significant difference between the community of developers and the PMC here and we definitely don't really have a consensus. One good suggestion that I had was from Eli. It sounds to me like his objection (and possibly related objections) to the logo that I proposed was based on the fact that the logo that I proposed matched the color scheme on our web site. In a side conversation (that obviously didn't officially happen, being off-list), it seemed that he would be willing to push for support for a logo with more flexibility in the way that core logo is encircled. In our conversation, it seems that a significant portion of the divergence of opinion may simply be that different groups are attuned to their own company or local community color palettes which makes logos tuned to other color combinations much less attractive. How about we have a logo family where the yellow elephant and "Powered by" text is the core and the circle or its graphical equivalent is optional? The intent would be to allow designers the freedom to help the logo conform to their local look while maintaining a core identity? Can we get consensus around that? On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > Ok, >I collated the votes filtering on the subject line. I know that method > missed some of the non-binding votes, but I don't believe it changed the > outcome. > > With the binding votes from the PMC: > > > > First Round 2 4 4 4 5 6 6 1Second Round (Drop 6) 2 5 4 4 5 6 > Third > Round (Drop 4) 2 8 5 7 > > So in the very close race, #2 wins. My spreadsheets, which are attached > below, show the counted votes. > > With all of the binding and non-binding votes: > > > > First Round 1 1 2 13 4 23 5 27 6 4Second Round(Drop 1) 2 13 4 > 23 5 27 6 5Third Round (Drop 6) 2 15 4 24 5 29Forth Round > (Drop 2) 4 35 5 31 > > -- Owen > > > > >
Re: [RESULT] Powered by Logo
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > So there is a significant difference between the community of developers and > the PMC here and we definitely don't really have a consensus. > > One good suggestion that I had was from Eli. It sounds to me like his > objection (and possibly related objections) to the logo that I proposed was > based on the fact that the logo that I proposed matched the color scheme on > our web site. In a side conversation (that obviously didn't officially > happen, being off-list), it seemed that he would be willing to push for > support for a logo with more flexibility in the way that core logo is > encircled. > Hey Ted, Off list I said I thought any of the logos were acceptable choices modulo some design tweaks, and that if the circle logo concept is accepted it would be good to adjust the circle itself. But the PMC did not vote for the circle logo, so it's a mute point. Thanks, Eli
Re: [RESULT] Powered by Logo
On Jun 24, 2011, at 9:47 AM, Eli Collins wrote: > > Off list I said I thought any of the logos were acceptable choices > modulo some design tweaks, and that if the circle logo concept is > accepted it would be good to adjust the circle itself. But the PMC > did not vote for the circle logo, so it's a mute point. Clearly the PMC is full of circle-phobes.
Re: [VOTE] Shall we adopt the "Defining Hadoop" page
On Jun 24, 2011, at 6:43 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: > Might it be better to improve the existing Apache trademark policy page? When the project is having trouble agreeing, reaching agreement at the foundation level seems unrealistic. Let's reach a workable solution for Hadoop, see how it functions in practice, iterate and improve, and then we can consider pushing it to the entire foundation. -- Owen
Re: Thinking about the next hadoop mainline release
+1. Arun, I can also help you with managing the release for HDFS. On 6/17/11 7:15 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: > I volunteer to be the RM for the release since I've been leading the NG NR > effort. > > Are folks ok with this? > > thanks, > Arun > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:45 PM, "Ted Dunning" wrote: > >> NG map reduce is a huge deal both in terms of making things better for >> users, but also in terms of unblocking the Hadoop development process. >> >> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Ryan Rawson wrote: >> - Next Generation Map-Reduce [MR-279] - Passing most tests now and discussing merging into trunk >>>
Re: Thinking about the next hadoop mainline release
+1. I'd be happy to help in any way possible. thanks mahadev On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Suresh Srinivas wrote: > +1. Arun, I can also help you with managing the release for HDFS. > > > On 6/17/11 7:15 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: > >> I volunteer to be the RM for the release since I've been leading the NG NR >> effort. >> >> Are folks ok with this? >> >> thanks, >> Arun >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:45 PM, "Ted Dunning" wrote: >> >>> NG map reduce is a huge deal both in terms of making things better for >>> users, but also in terms of unblocking the Hadoop development process. >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Ryan Rawson wrote: >>> > - Next Generation Map-Reduce [MR-279] > - Passing most tests now and discussing merging into trunk > > -- thanks mahadev @mahadevkonar
Re: Thinking about the next hadoop mainline release
Thanks Suresh! Todd - I'd appreciate if you could help on some of the HBase/Performance jiras... thanks! Sent from my iPhone On Jun 24, 2011, at 2:09 PM, "Suresh Srinivas" wrote: > +1. Arun, I can also help you with managing the release for HDFS. > > > On 6/17/11 7:15 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: > >> I volunteer to be the RM for the release since I've been leading the NG NR >> effort. >> >> Are folks ok with this? >> >> thanks, >> Arun >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:45 PM, "Ted Dunning" wrote: >> >>> NG map reduce is a huge deal both in terms of making things better for >>> users, but also in terms of unblocking the Hadoop development process. >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Ryan Rawson wrote: >>> > - Next Generation Map-Reduce [MR-279] > - Passing most tests now and discussing merging into trunk >
Hadoop´s Internationalization
Regards to all the list. I´m looking for a proper way to work on the internationalization of Hadoop, but I don´t know if this is a good project or if this is useful for the community, at least, I think that it would be very useful for many people that want to see the messages of the project in another language, for example, in Spanish. I would like to work on this, but I don´t know how to start on this. I think that a first step is to translate the message of the commands more used by administrators and developers of Hadoop: (The Hadoop fs shell, for example). It would be very useful to have on the source code, a directory for earch language´s messages, but I don´t know if this could carry out many changes on the main API. What do you think about this? Thanls for your time -- Marcos Luís Ortíz Valmaseda Software Engineer (UCI) http://marcosluis2186.posterous.com http://twitter.com/marcosluis2186
Re: [VOTE] Shall we adopt the "Defining Hadoop" page
On 06/24/2011 07:07 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > On Jun 24, 2011, at 6:43 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: > >> Might it be better to improve the existing Apache trademark policy >> page? > > When the project is having trouble agreeing, reaching agreement at > the foundation level seems unrealistic. ASF trademark policy is set by Shane, VP Trademark, not by a committee. Doug
Re: Thinking about the next hadoop mainline release
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Thanks Suresh! > > Todd - I'd appreciate if you could help on some of the HBase/Performance > jiras... thanks! > > Sure thing. -Todd -- Todd Lipcon Software Engineer, Cloudera
