then this is an acceptable usage.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>>> Chris
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> So I think we are in the clear with respect to zstd usage as long as
>> we
>> >>> keep
codec where the user needs to get the headers
> and
> >>> libraries for zstd and configure it into the native Hadoop build.
> >>>
> >>> Jason
> >>>
> >>> On Monday, July 17, 2017 9:44 AM, Sean Busbey
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
as an optional codec where the user needs to get the headers and
>>> libraries for zstd and configure it into the native Hadoop build.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> On Monday, July 17, 2017 9:44 AM, Sean Busbey
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>
nity is also looking at what to do about
>>
>> our inclusion of zstd. We've had it in releases since late 2016. My
>>
>> plan was to request that they relicense it.
>>
>>
>> Perhaps the Hadoop PMC could join HBase in the request?
>>
>>
>> On Sun
ad it in releases since late 2016. My
>
> plan was to request that they relicense it.
>
>
> Perhaps the Hadoop PMC could join HBase in the request?
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Allen Wittenauer
>
> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > It looks like HA
16, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Allen Wittenauer
wrote:
>
> It looks like HADOOP-13578 added Facebook's zstd compression codec.
> Unfortunately, that codec is using the same 3-clause BSD (LICENSE file) +
> patent grant license (PATENTS file) that React is using and
wrote:
>
> It looks like HADOOP-13578 added Facebook's zstd compression codec.
> Unfortunately, that codec is using the same 3-clause BSD (LICENSE file) +
> patent grant license (PATENTS file) that React is using and RocksDB was using.
>
> S
It looks like HADOOP-13578 added Facebook's zstd compression codec.
Unfortunately, that codec is using the same 3-clause BSD (LICENSE file) +
patent grant license (PATENTS file) that React is using and RocksDB was using.
Should that code get rev
