+1 Encourages folks to read and write designs/ideas.
Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 21, 2019, at 6:30 PM, leesf <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 > > Best, > Leesf > > <[email protected]> 于2019年10月22日周二 上午3:40写道： > >> +1 >> >> Balaji.V On Monday, October 21, 2019, 11:38:01 AM PDT, Y. Ethan Guo >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> +1 on RFC. It's good to have a few pages of RFC to get a quick look of an >> idea. It doesn't have to be a full standard like some IETF RFCs. >> >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 5:31 AM Taher Koitawala <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Agree Vinoth +1 >>> >>> Regards, >>> Taher Koitawala >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 5:49 PM Bhavani Sudha <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 on RFC. Makes sense to me. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 8:29 PM Vinoth Chandar <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Someone asked me this and made me thinking about it. While HIP >> process >>>>> covers concrete proposals to Hudi, sometimes we may need to just >> write >>> up >>>>> some ideas and solicit comments (e.g HudiLink >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__cwiki.apache.org_confluence_display_HUDI_Hudi-2Bfor-2BContinuous-2BDeep-2BAnalytics&d=DwIBaQ&c=r2dcLCtU9q6n0vrtnDw9vg&r=z456dQQXMUCz1m72nlkFQpylUpdOVMBG38x2peG1m44&m=_sDvLQTlJhoOFYHtyXSz--G9D5S7gGSf-mzLhY6PSbg&s=BtmOFE9z1baBO8A7gX7xN4a_-bJ8W97q2GBCg2HecaA&e= >>>>> ) >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Request-5Ffor-5FComments&d=DwIBaQ&c=r2dcLCtU9q6n0vrtnDw9vg&r=z456dQQXMUCz1m72nlkFQpylUpdOVMBG38x2peG1m44&m=_sDvLQTlJhoOFYHtyXSz--G9D5S7gGSf-mzLhY6PSbg&s=939DidQWDsxU0ERbE2lGD3Jjj5iwqKc8d4_TyoPWaJ8&e= >>> RFCs are used for >>>>> defining, reasoning about Internet standards. >>>>> >>>>> I would like to propose that >>>>> - we can rename the HIP process to RFC, with an additional use-case >> of >>>>> covering docs written purely for discussion/feedback. For e.g, Flink >>>>> support thread was dense to follow, someone could have used a >> document >>> to >>>>> fully present their ideas (we will still keep discussion on mailing >>>> list). >>>>> - While I concede renaming may be cosmetic, RFC (Request For >> Comments) >>>> has >>>>> a broader scope, which I like. :) >>>>> >>>> >>>
