On Apr 6, 2010, at 6:02 AM, Steve Loughran wrote:
> Allen Wittenauer wrote:
>> On Apr 5, 2010, at 5:06 PM, Chris K Wensel wrote:
>>> we need a well healed 1.0 sooner than later.
>> Why?
>
> I think it would be good for a 0.21 with the newly renamed artifacts
> hadoop-common, hadoop-hdfs and hadoop-mapred out there; I think the new APIs
> should be made available in a publicly usable state. I'd rather that than
> suddenly say "oh, too many people are using the unstable stuff we should give
> it a new number". By keeping it at 0.20, it makes clear its apis are unstable,
My main point was that suddenly people seem to be hot to declare
something 1.0. I'm trying to understand why, suddenly, various parts of the
community seem to think 1.0 needs to happen.
[The usual answer appears to be "adoption" but I think that's a
bull-something reason masquerading as "commercial viability"... which to me
should not be a primary concern around an *open source* software package. I
can't help but wonder if there are now a bunch of companies that feel safe
deploying OpenSSL based software since they finally declared 1.0. (Altho it
would be nice to have a Hadoop 1.0 before 10 years elapse. *smile* But if that
is as long as it takes, that's as long as it takes, IMO.) ]
