Thanks for sharing this, Chris. Cheers, Tom
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Chris Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Tom White <[email protected]> wrote: >> Chris, >> >> Didn't you vote +1 too? (If I recall correctly from the discussion.) > > At the start of the discussion I was leaning toward a +1, but elected > to abstain from the vote as I read the responses. I didn't add an > explicit +/-0, as I'd already added all the content I had in the > discussion thread, and would only repeat myself. Since you ask: > > Vinod's point, i.e. "Where are the HDFS + MR issues?" gave me pause. > There really aren't that many. The only exception I can think of are > the RAID JIRAs, which aren't MR issues. Removing contrib is a better > fix. The projects really are separating, and I expect this will become > clearer as we cut more releases. If not, we should revisit this topic. > > After these votes, "Hadoop committers" are defined as PMC members, or > contributors who independently earn commit status in both projects. > Most members of the current PMC required about two years of full-time > work in Hadoop before they were added. That's unusually steep, and the > reason I didn't vote -1. > > There's a lack of data that makes this ambivalence hard to resolve. > The arguments in favor are too abstract (trust, coherency, etc.) to > make a definitive statements about the cost of separate lists. > Examples of the form, "I tried to do X, but was prevented and it > caused a costly, bureaucratic detour that took N days to resolve" (as > Vinod provided for lacking access to Common) are persuasive to me. > Hypothetical contributors that might be prevented from trying > something are compelling, but less so. I'd like to get more experience > working and releasing before I vote one way or the other. -C >
