Hi All,
I am sorry for the confusion. I didn't mean to say that Phoenix should be a
sub-project of Apache HBase.
My +1 for Phoenix as Top Level Project.
At Intuit, we have been extensively using Phoenix.
Thanks,
Anil Gupta
Software Engineer, Intuit Inc
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Anil Gu
It is indeed very specific for HBase use I suppose. Would it be more
beneficial to make it sub-project of HBase to get full community
support from HBase?
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:43 PM, James Taylor wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We're pleased to share a draft ASF incubation proposal for Phoenix, a
> SQL
Phoenix is a great addition as sub-project of HBase.
+1 from me.
Thanks,
Anil Gupta
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
+1
St.Ack
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Andreas Neumann wrote:
> The discussion about the Weave proposal has calmed. As the outcome of the
> discussion, we have chosen a new name for the project, Twill. I would like
> to call a vote for Twill to become an incubated project.
>
> The proposal
+1 (binding)
On 14 November 2013 03:23, Jakob Homan wrote:
> +1 (binding). Verified MD5. License, disclaimer and notice all look good.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Hyunsik Choi wrote:
>
>> Ping - just a friendly reminder that we're seeking votes on our first
>> release here.
>>
>> -
Sounds good, we will continue the process with the proposed name Twill.
Thanks -Andreas.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> We had similar issue with MetaModel where there are a lot of projects
> with name MetaModel but the name was approved given it needs to always
> mentio
Hi All,
We're pleased to share a draft ASF incubation proposal for Phoenix, a
SQL layer over HBase, initially developed at Salesforce.com and
subsequently open sourced on github
(https://github.com/forcedotcom/phoenix). Instead of using Map-reduce
to processes queries, it compiles SQL directly int
On Nov 13, 2013, at 1:14 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:58 PM, ant elder wrote:
>> So, we _can_ let podlings have their own binding release votes and we
>> could do our own "pTLP" type experiments without even needing to go to
>> the board. We should try that. Not for ev
On 11/13/13 10:14 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" wrote:
>
>While a number of people have expressed a preference for the approach of
>electing more podling contributors directly onto the IPMC, in practice it
>remains uncertain whether the IPMC is capable of identifying, nominating
>and
>voting in enough c
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013, at 06:14 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:58 PM, ant elder wrote:
> > So, we _can_ let podlings have their own binding release votes and we
> > could do our own "pTLP" type experiments without even needing to go to
> > the board. We should try that. N
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:58 PM, ant elder wrote:
> So, we _can_ let podlings have their own binding release votes and we
> could do our own "pTLP" type experiments without even needing to go to
> the board. We should try that. Not for every podling but just for
> select ones where the circumstan
+1 (binding). Verified MD5. License, disclaimer and notice all look good.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Hyunsik Choi wrote:
> Ping - just a friendly reminder that we're seeking votes on our first
> release here.
>
> - hyunsik
>
> On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Hyunsik Choi wrote:
> > De
12 matches
Mail list logo
