I just don't want to, say, exclude Apache Geode because we have Apache Ignite or vice versa.
I agree with letting the presence / absence of maintainers be the main judgement call. But, I don't think that's being "opinionated". BigTop's user and developer communities overlap substantially. I think that's letting the "market" decide -- if people find having a particular component in BigTop valuable, they will spend time to maintain its packaging. On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: > From the general POV, I do agree that there's nothing inherently wrong > about > having overlapping or even competing technologies as a part of our stack. > My > comment was aimed to give the OP'a author a perspective of what is in > already > and weigh it in. Not a call of discouragement ;) > > Now, I respectfully disagree about not-being "opinionated". That's what > software distributions do all the time - they pick and choose what they > want > to support and what not to. Which goes to the second point you expressed: > as > long as there's a reliant maintainer for a given component, we might as > well > on-board it. But the reverse principle has to be enacted as equally: if a > maintenance has dwindled - we should reserve the rights to drop the > component > all together. Ultimately, it needs to be a community decision. Most recent > discussion of the kind is here [1]. > > Does it make sense? > Cos > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP-2804 > > On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 02:37PM, RJ Nowling wrote: > > I wanted to single out the issue of overlapping components that Cos > raised > > for discussion without derailing the Crail conversation, so I'm starting > a > > new thread. > > > > Cos said: > > > > > - from a quick glance at the project, looks like it fits the general > > bucket > > > of data fabric platforms. Something like Apache Ignite comes to mind, > > while > > > Aluxio, as a simple caching solution, only has partial target > > > functionality. While there's no limitation on having multiple > components > > > with overlapping functionality in a given Bigtop stack (after all, we > > have > > > HDFS and QFS), it's an aspect worthy of some consideration. > > > > I don't think having overlapping components is bad or should be avoided. > > Apache has tons of TLPs that overlap: Drill vs Hive vs Phoenix, Spark vs > > Flink vs Apex vs Storm vs Samza, Bookkeeper vs Zookeeper. Rather, the > > "Apache way" seems to be to provide even ground for all projects and let > > "the market" decide whether projects succeed or fail. > > > > From that standpoint, I think BigTop should not be opinionated about > which > > components are included as long as someone is willing to maintain them. >
