GitHub user yaooqinn added a comment to the discussion: Add a new backend: Bolt
> Both projects are following Apache 2.0 license, Bolt's dependency is declared > in [NOTICE.txt](https://github.com/bytedance/bolt/blob/main/NOTICE.txt). We > are here to address any specific legal concerns, though there are no known > issues to our knowledge. In terms of OSS license, yup, it's legal. But socially and technically weird. What is bolt's future plan? A permanently independent fork with no intention to stay aligned long‑term? Or an upstream-first fork where new work goes upstream ASAP? Or a downstream first fork keeps cherry-picking without feedback? > Bolt backend https://github.com/apache/incubator-gluten/pull/11261 only fork > and modify the existing backends-velox (whose IP belongs to Gluten repository > & ASF) without any Velox-related code Yes, I also mean it's just a requirement for this patch. For velox, that's a problem for you to tackle in incubator, not here > Bolt is open to accepts commits from Gluten commits. Internally, every Bolt > commit is checked against all DBMS integration including Spark-on-Gluten to > ensure the stability. Currently Gluten backends-velox depends on ibm/velox > which requires frequent rebases with upstream so Bolt backend reduces the > long-term maintenance cost without messy rebase burden and providing first > party supports on Gluten integration. So, bolt is going to replace velox entirely in gluten, then the reduction of maintenance you've mentioned could actually happen. Do you have a clear plan for that？ As a fork of velox, why the integration for bolt result in a 260k+ patch? It doesn't look a right way to maintain. What's the amount of duplication? Consider a better approach such as new API exposure? If spark adds a new feature or function, the gluten contributors need to apply an identical patch to velox and bolt, right? Otherwise, Technical debt accumulates quickly. CI cost increase, the PR process as well > Assuming you refer to "vendor-neutral", Bolt project is in the process of > submitting a proposal to ASF incubator, targeting 26Q1. We deeply value and > encourage contributions from Gluten community to build the future of native > engine acceleration. The merge of Bolt backend to the main branch is a > foundational step to expose Spark-on-Bolt capability for community adoption > which in return pushes the project to be "vendor-neutral". A proposal to ASF incubator does not represent vendor-neutral. You encourage others to contribute bolt, that's good, but bolt itself does not follow the upstream-first practice. We're in an awkward position. GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/incubator-gluten/discussions/10929#discussioncomment-15755264 ---- This is an automatically sent email for [email protected]. To unsubscribe, please send an email to: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
