On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 9:50 PM, Lei Chang <[email protected]> wrote: > My understanding of the intention here is not to maintain our own copy and > and the target is to contribute it back to ORC project. It is just for > improving developer efficiency that might be introduced by delay from > acceptance from another project. > > Hong and I had a offline discussion, I think we can have a better way for > this. From initial development, we even do not need to change the library > and if changes are needed, the proposal is to start JIRAs and submit pull > requests on Apache ORC.
That actually would be an ideal choice. Another choice, of course, would be to work with ORC community to enable plug-points that would then enable you to replace/augment parts of ORC library functionality with your own code (C++ OOP is supposed to be good for that ;-)). Finally, if all else fails you can always maintain a copy of the library in a branch waiting for all your required changes to find their way into the ORC release propper. And speaking of branches: at the end of the day our #1 priority should be unblocking the upcoming HAWQ release. While we can keep the conversation going on what to do with the ORC, we need to get a release branch without that commit out so that we can have a release done. Makes sense? Thanks, Roman.
