On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 02:52, Steve Loughran <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15/06/11 03:51, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 19:46, Allen Wittenauer<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 14, 2011, at 6:45 PM, Eli Collins wrote: >>>> >>>> Are we really going to go after all the web companies that patch in an >>>> enhancement to their current Hadoop build and tell them to stop saying >>>> that they are using Hadoop? You've patched Hadoop many times, should >>>> your employer not be able to say they use Hadoop? I'm -1 on a >>>> proposal that does this. >>> >>> I think there is a big difference between some company that uses >>> Hadoop with some patches internally and a company that puts out a >>> distribution for others to use, usually for-profit. >> >> Just as the reminder: this whole conversation has started as a result >> of EMC announcement of 100% compatible version of Apache Hadoop. So, >> Allen's point is right on target here: the above example is simply >> incorrect. > > I seem to recall this dicussion starting a bit earlier, with the whole > notion of compatibility, before EMC got involved. > > Regarding the vote, I think the discussion here is interesting and should be > finalised before the vote. It's worth resolving the issues. > > also: banners, stickers and clothing? Can I have T-shirts saying "I broke > the hadoop build" with the logo on, or should it be "I broke the Apache > Hadoop build"?
I think such a T-shirt should be forcefully worn on any person who did just that.
