Just in case that wasn't considered: Not every document needs to be on cwiki, it is perfectly fine to write up ideas that are not a formal "HIP" in gdocs or similar.
Thomas On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 9:40 PM Nishith <[email protected]> wrote: > +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. :) > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> >
