On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote:

> Todd,
>
> Good to have you weigh in on this.  You provide a good counterweight.
>
> To take a new hypothetical, suppose that one of the many, many patches that
> Cloudera has championed for Hadoop is critical for Hbase operation or makes
> Hbase faster.
>
> Is it reasonable to answer a question of the form "Is HDFS-xxx fixed?" with
> "Fixed in CDH, followups off-list"?
>

One distinguishing factor is that CDH is Apache 2.0 licensed free and open
source software. And the answer would never be "fixed in CDH but not in
Apache trunk" -- any non-trivial changes in CDH are committed to trunk
before we backport them. So, I feel like pointing people to CDH is
appropriate for this open-source list.

As for Cloudera Enterprise (our paid closed-source product) I'd expect to be
held to the same standards as a MapR employee touting MapR -- i.e. I
wouldn't bring it up on the public mailing list.


> That seems to be important information for not just the original poster but
> others who may have the same problem.
>
> What is the consensus on that?
>
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Another answer that I want to underscore is "MapR supports Hbase.  A
> > lot."
> > >
> >
> > The issue is that I might be then tempted to start arguing that Cloudera
> > Enterprise supports HBase better than MapR. Then we devolve into an
> > annoying
> > vendor war which doesn't help anyone.
> >
> > Best to just set a policy and stick to it for public responses. I don't
> see
> > anything wrong with your replying off-list to the requester with a sales
> > pitch. This provides the information that might help the user without
> > risking polluting the -user list with a lot of discussion of commercial
> > products.
> >
>



-- 
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

Reply via email to