Todd,

Would opening trunk to Commit-Then-Review and maintaining branches
using Review-Then-Commit help? That would involve folks using stable
branches in production...

-- dims


On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----
>
>> From: Todd Lipcon <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: Thu, August 12, 2010 6:01:19 PM
>> Subject: Re: time for a reboot?
>
>> Hey  look, a thread about me!
>>
>> The majority of my contributions were at my  previous job, but I did get
>> committership and do the 0.2 release after  joining Cloudera as Doug said.
>> Cloudera does use Thrift internally, so having  a stable release out was
>> important for us.
>>
>> I haven't been as involved  in further releases because frankly, Thrift does
>> what it's supposed to do and  does a good job of it. What the ASF seems to
>> see as a stagnating project  seems to me to just be a mature one - Thrift has
>> a single purpose, achieves  it effectively, and does a good job for lots and
>> lots of people including  both my former and current employers. The major
>> issues I've run into (and  seen coworkers run into) have had to do with the
>> release packaging and build,  which we've improved a bit, and will improve on
>> the distribution side of  things as people like Debian start packaging the
>> bits.
>
> My concern is more that Thrift has become a 1-man show over the past
> year than that there is stagnation here.  Jira tickets get filed, commits
> happen, and eventually releases happen, but that's all being done by the
> heroism of Bryan.  Apache projects are collaborative in nature, and
> usually committers care enough about one another not to let one person
> carry the project along all by themselves.  If there isn't sufficient
> interest amongst the current committers to participate in development,
> perhaps we should be recruiting from those filing patches in Jira.
>
> With respect to commit-then-review, httpd has had that as its policy since
> the very beginning, and it manages to produce consistently stable releases.
> Ditto for the subversion project.  Hadoop is certainly not the model of
> Apache-style version-control tree management that others should aspire to,
> FWIW.  There are serious internal concerns about the overall health of the
> hadoop development ecosystem as it continues to evolve towards a 1.0 release.
>
>
>
>



-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com

Reply via email to