On May 14, 2011, at 12:41 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Steve Loughran <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think we should revisit this issue before people with their own agendas >> define what compatibility with Apache Hadoop is for us >> > > I agree completely. As you point out, this week we've had a flood of > products calling themselves "Hadoop" or "Distribution of Hadoop" that > include only a part of Hadoop. This is will dilute Apache's Hadoop trademark > and create consumer confusion. > > Licensing >> -Use of the Hadoop codebase must follow the Apache License >> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 >> -plug in components that are dynamically linked to (Filesystems and >> schedulers) don't appear to be derivative works on my reading of this, >> > > +1 > Plugins are usually considered independent works. Note that the Apache > license does permit commercial closed-source derivative works. A company > could take Hadoop's code, modify it, and sell a binary release as long as > they meet the conditions of the Apache license. > > >> Naming >> -this is something for branding@apache, they will have their opinions. >> The key one is that the name "Apache Hadoop" must get used, and it's >> important to make clear it is a derivative work. >> -I don't think you can claim to have a Distribution/Fork/Version of Apache >> Hadoop if you swap out big chunks of it for alternate filesystems, MR >> engines, etc. Some description of this is needed >> "Supports the Apache Hadoop MapReduce engine on top of Filesystem XYZ" >> > > The Hadoop name is the primary tool that the project has for minimizing > customer confusion. I think we need to create a very clear definition of > what can be called Hadoop and what can not. Apache gives the PMCs a fair > amount of latitude in picking the policy for their project name and I think > we need to do so. > > Given the large number of so-called Hadoop products that are being released, > I believe that we should require "Hadoop" to mean specifically the Apache > Hadoop releases (possibly with a few critical security patches). > > Projects that are derivative works can either be "powered by Apache Hadoop," > or "based on Apache Hadoop." > > What do others think? > I think thats a great idea. Maybe we should also create names/marks around the interfaces as well.
> -- Owen
