No one as in no one from hbase community. There're many Apache projects where some of them would have active volunteer(s) for the Spark connector.
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:18 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > If no one is working on it, having it in a different repo doesn't get it to > downstream any faster. > > On Sep 13, 2017 9:57 PM, "Ted Yu" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > If we leave it in the master branch, does that mean the code would not be > > transferred to additional ASF repo ? > > > > If so, that implies the hbase-spark module would not face user for > extended > > period of time. > > > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Is a formal vote needed? > > > > > > Looks like consensus to me; at least on it not making 2.0. > > > > > > Seems easiest in the short term to leave it in the master branch, > unless > > > some folks are ready to make a push. That puts off deciding how some > > > separate repo logistics work in hopes we can skip them. > > > > > > On Sep 13, 2017 9:37 PM, "Ted Yu" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Several days passed. > > > > > > > > Sean: > > > > Can you start a VOTE thread ? > > > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > My (potentially ignorant) understanding would be that the Spark > > > > > integration is a good candidate to separate out into its own > release > > > > cycle. > > > > > I can't think of a reason we'd need to keep it in the main tree in > > > terms > > > > of > > > > > HBase Java API (it would only rely on public API stuff, right?). > > > > > > > > > > The lack of folks with time and expertise makes me think that a > > > separate > > > > > release cycle makes me think that's the right call. > > > > > > > > > > On 9/10/17 4:16 PM, Ted Yu wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> bq. revisit the possibility of an independent release cycle run > out > > of > > > > an > > > > >> additional ASF repo. > > > > >> > > > > >> This seems to be more practical than the other alternatives. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Hi Folks! > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Our Stack recently gave an updated timeline on HBase 2.0 related > > > > >>> releases [1] that has us quickly approaching feature freeze for > > beta > > > > >>> releases. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Previously, we had a great discussion on what it takes for our > > > > >>> hbase-spark integration to be ready for release[2]. (see the > > summary > > > > >>> in the scope document I put up on [3]). > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Unfortunately, since the start of August my day to day tasks have > > > > >>> pulled me away from focusing on chasing down the goals in the > scope > > > > >>> document. Additionally it seems, to me at least, that other folks > > are > > > > >>> similarly focused on other things. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Is there anyone with enough cycles to work through the milestones > > > > >>> called out in the scope document in time for deadlines that > AFAICT > > > are > > > > >>> measured in a handful of weeks? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> If not I suggest we either start pulling things out and aim for > the > > > > >>> 2.1 release, or revisit the possibility of an independent release > > > > >>> cycle run out of an additional ASF repo. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> [1]: https://s.apache.org/wedV > > > > >>> [2]: https://s.apache.org/O53T > > > > >>> [3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18405 > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
