One question one this propose, if i want to introduce a new module, shall I put it under package *com.uber.hoodie*? Or simply org.apache.hudi?
Thanks Jing On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:44 AM Vinoth Chandar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Could not agree more. Its captured under the work for the first release > already https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HUDI-121?filter=-1 > > Balaji is the RM. Plan to do this in August. > > One issue we realized was that we need a solid migration path, since the > tables are all registered with com.uber.hoodie.HoodieInputFormat as the > input format. > We plan to do a HIP around this, once we get past the jar/bundle redoing.. > (thats another logical step we are considering before doing this, to test > with older setups more easily) > > Hope that helps > /thanks/vinoth > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:20 PM vino yang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > I find hudi still uses the package pattern like "com/uber/hoodie". > > > > Since it has joined the ASF incubator, should it follow the Apache > package > > naming rules? For example: org/apache/hoodie(hudi)? > > > > Is there any plan about renaming? > > > > Best, > > Vino > > >
