drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julien Le Dem <jul...@ledem.net>
Subject Re: Naming the new ValueVector Initiative
Date Thu, 17 Dec 2015 19:09:44 GMT
I guess what I meant is: separate repos => separate releases.
One repo can still have separate releases as was mentioned.

I’m not too fond of the separate repos in parquet anymore.
The only reason I would split to a separate repo now is if we have large files for regression
testing and that’s because of how git works.

Separate directories java and cpp seems a given since they will build independently.

I’d vote for just one repo with /format /java /cpp.
both /java and /cpp depend on /format

releasing the format independently is useful because the semantics are different than for
an API.
A breaking change in the format may not be an API change and vice-versa.

Julien


> On Dec 16, 2015, at 7:03 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> One repo should be a given.
> 
> Separate directories should be the question.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jason Altekruse <altekrusejason@gmail.com <mailto:altekrusejason@gmail.com>>
wrote:
> I think that is a worthwhile discussion, parallel vs independent releases, but I don't
understand why it relates to one repo or not. Couldn't the release tag names just include
the language (cpp, java python)? What other parts of version control are related to releasing?
> 
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Julien Le Dem <julien@dremio.com <mailto:julien@dremio.com>>
wrote:
> for the git repos it boils down to wether we want to release arrow-cpp and arrow-java
independently or together with the same version numbers.
>  
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com <mailto:jacques@dremio.com>>
wrote:
> Thanks Wes, that's great!
> On Dec 14, 2015 9:44 AM, "Wes McKinney" <wes@cloudera.com <mailto:wes@cloudera.com>>
wrote:
> 
> > hi folks,
> >
> > In the interim I created a new public GitHub organization to host code
> > for this effort so we can organize ourselves in advance of more
> > progress in the ASF:
> >
> > https://github.com/arrow-data <https://github.com/arrow-data>
> >
> > I have a partial C++ implementation of the Arrow spec that I can move
> > there, along with a to-be-Markdown-ified version of a specification
> > subject to more iteration. The more pressing short term matter will be
> > making some progress on the metadata / data headers / IPC protocol
> > (e.g. using Flatbuffers or the like).
> >
> > Thoughts on git repo structure?
> >
> > 1) Avro-style — "one repo to rule them all"
> > 2) Parquet-style — arrow-format, arrow-cpp, arrow-java, etc.
> >
> > (I'm personally more in the latter camp, though integration tests may
> > be more tedious that way)
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com <mailto:jacques@dremio.com>>
wrote:
> > > I've opened a name search for our top vote getter.
> > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-92 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-92>
> > >
> > >
> > > I also just realized that my previously email dropped other recipients.
> > > Here it is below.
> > >
> > > ----
> > > I think we can call the voting closed. Top vote getters:
> > >
> > > Apache Arrow (17)
> > > Apache Herringbone (9)
> > > Apache Joist (8)
> > > Apache Colbuf (8)
> > >
> > > I'll up a PODLINGNAMESEARCH-* shortly for Arrow.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jacques Nadeau
> > > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Marcel Kornacker <marcel@cloudera.com <mailto:marcel@cloudera.com>>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Just added my vote.
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Wes McKinney <wes@cloudera.com <mailto:wes@cloudera.com>>
wrote:
> > >> > Shall we call the voting closed? Any last stragglers?
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com
<mailto:ted.dunning@gmail.com>>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Apache can handle this if we set the groundwork in place.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Also, Twitter's lawyers work for Twitter, not for Apache. As such,
> > >> >> their
> > >> >> opinions can't be taken by Apache as legal advice.  There are
issues
> > of
> > >> >> privilege, conflict of interest and so on.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Alex Levenson
> > >> >> <alexlevenson@twitter.com <mailto:alexlevenson@twitter.com>>
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I can ask about whether Twitter's lawyers can help out --
is that
> > >> >>> something we need? Or is that something apache helps out with
in the
> > >> >>> next
> > >> >>> step?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Julian Hyde <jhyde@apache.org
<mailto:jhyde@apache.org>>
> > wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> +1 to have a vote tomorrow.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Assuming that Vector is out of play, I just did a quick
search for
> > >> >>>> the
> > >> >>>> top 4 remaining, (“arrow”, “honeycomb”, “herringbone”,
“joist"), at
> > >> >>>> sourceforge, open hub, trademarkia, and on google. There
are no
> > >> >>>> trademarks
> > >> >>>> for these in similar subject areas. There is a moderately
active
> > >> >>>> project
> > >> >>>> called “joist” [1].
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> I will point out that “Apache Arrow” has native-american
> > connotations
> > >> >>>> that we may or may not want to live with (just ask the
Washington
> > >> >>>> Redskins
> > >> >>>> how they feel about their name).
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> If someone would like to vet other names, use the links
on
> > >> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90>, and
> > fill
> > >> >>>> out
> > >> >>>> column C in the spreadsheet.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Julian
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> [1] https://github.com/stephenh/joist <https://github.com/stephenh/joist>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com
<mailto:jacques@dremio.com>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> +1
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> --
> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau
> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Wes McKinney <wes@cloudera.com
<mailto:wes@cloudera.com>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Should we have a last call for votes, closing EOD tomorrow
> > (Tuesday)?
> > >> >>>> I
> > >> >>>> missed this for a few days last week with holiday travel.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Julian Hyde <
> > julian@hydromatic.net <mailto:julian@hydromatic.net>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Consulting a lawyer is part of the Apache branding process
but the
> > >> >>>> first
> > >> >>>> stage is to gather a list of potential conflicts -
> > >> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90> is an
> > >> >>>> example.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> The other part, frankly, is to pick your battles.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> A year or so ago Actian re-branded Vectorwise as Vector.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > http://www.zdnet.com/article/actian-consolidates-its-analytics-portfolio/ <http://www.zdnet.com/article/actian-consolidates-its-analytics-portfolio/>.
> > >> >>>> Given that it is an analytic database in the Hadoop space
I think
> > >> >>>> that is
> > >> >>>> as close to a “direct hit” as it gets. I don’t think
we need a
> > lawyer
> > >> >>>> to
> > >> >>>> tell us that. Certainly it makes sense to look for conflicts
for
> > the
> > >> >>>> other
> > >> >>>> alternatives before consulting lawyers.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Julian
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 9:42 PM, Marcel Kornacker <marcel@cloudera.com
<mailto:marcel@cloudera.com>
> > >
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jacques Nadeau <
> > jacques@dremio.com <mailto:jacques@dremio.com>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Ok guys,
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> I don't think anyone is doing a thorough analysis of viaability.
I
> > >> >>>> did a
> > >> >>>> quick glance and the top one (Vector) seems like it would
have an
> > >> >>>> issue
> > >> >>>> with conflict of an Actian product. The may be fine. Let's
do a
> > >> >>>> second
> > >> >>>> phase vote.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> I'm assuming you mean Vectorwise?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Before we do anything else, could we have a lawyer look
into this?
> > >> >>>> Last
> > >> >>>> time around that I remember (Parquet), Twitter's lawyers
did a good
> > >> >>>> job
> > >> >>>> of
> > >> >>>> weeding out the potential trademark violations.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Alex, could Twitter get involved this time around as well?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Pick your top 3 (1,2,3 with 3 being top preference)
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Let's get this done by Friday and then we can do a podling
name
> > >> >>>> search
> > >> >>>> starting with the top one.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Link again:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532&vpid=A1
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532&vpid=A1>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> thanks
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> --
> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau
> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Jacques Nadeau <
> > jacques@dremio.com <mailto:jacques@dremio.com>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Ok, it looks like we have a candidate list (we actually
got 11
> > since
> > >> >>>> there was a three-way tie for ninth place):
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> VectorArrowhoneycombHerringbonejoistV2Pietcolbufbatonimpulsevictor
> > >> >>>> Next we need to do trademark searches on each of these
to see
> > whether
> > >> >>>> we're likely to have success. I've moved candidates to
a second
> > tab:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Anybody want to give a hand in analyzing potential conflicts?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> --
> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau
> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Jacques Nadeau <
> > jacques@dremio.com <mailto:jacques@dremio.com>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Everybody should pick their ten favorites using the numbers
1 to
> > 10.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> 10 is most preferred
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> --
> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau
> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Ted Dunning <
> > ted.dunning@gmail.com <mailto:ted.dunning@gmail.com>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Single vote for most preferred?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Single transferable vote?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Jacques Nadeau <
> > jacques@dremio.com <mailto:jacques@dremio.com>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Given that a bunch of people added names to the sheet,
I'll take
> > >> >>>> that as tacit agreement to the proposed process.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Let's move to the first vote phase. I've added a column
for
> > >> >>>> everybody's votes. Let's try to wrap up the vote by 10am
on
> > >> >>>> Wednesday.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> thanks!
> > >> >>>> Jacques
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> --
> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau
> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jacques Nadeau <
> > jacques@apache.org <mailto:jacques@apache.org>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Hey Guys,
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> It sounds like we need to do a little more work on the
Vector
> > >> >>>> proposal
> > >> >>>> before the board would like to consider it. The main point
of
> > >> >>>> contention
> > >> >>>> right now is the name of the project. We need to decide
on a name
> > >> >>>> and get
> > >> >>>> it signed off through PODLINGNAMESEARCH.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Naming is extremely subjective so I'd like to propose
a process for
> > >> >>>> selection that minimizes pain. This is an initial proposal
and
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> We do the naming in the following steps
> > >> >>>> - 1: Collect a set of names to be considered
> > >> >>>> - 2: Run a vote for 2 days where each member ranks their
top 10
> > >> >>>> options
> > >> >>>> 1..10
> > >> >>>> - 3: Take the top ten vote getters and do a basic analysis
of
> > >> >>>> whether we
> > >> >>>> think that any have legal issues. Keep dropping names
that have
> > >> >>>> this until
> > >> >>>> we get with 10 reasonably solid candidate names
> > >> >>>> - 5: Take the top ten names and give people 48 hours to
rank their
> > >> >>>> top 3
> > >> >>>> names
> > >> >>>> - 6: Start a PODLINGNAMESEARCH on the top rank one, if
that doesn't
> > >> >>>> work,
> > >> >>>> try the second and third options.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> I suggest we take name suggestions for step 1 from everyone
but
> > then
> > >> >>>> constrain the voting to the newly proposed project [1].
We could
> > >> >>>> just do
> > >> >>>> this in a private email thread but I think doing it on
Drill dev is
> > >> >>>> better
> > >> >>>> in the interest of transparency. This isn't the perfect
place for
> > >> >>>> that but
> > >> >>>> I'm not sure a better place exists.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> I'm up for changing any or all of this depending on what
others
> > >> >>>> think. Just
> > >> >>>> wanted to get the ball rolling on a proposed process.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> If this works, I've posted a doc at [2] that we can use
for step 1.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Thanks,
> > >> >>>> Jacques
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> [1] List of proposed new project members/voters: Todd
Lipcon, Ted
> > >> >>>> Dunning,
> > >> >>>> Michael Stack, P. Taylor Goetz, Julian Hyde, Julien Le
Dem, Jacques
> > >> >>>> Nadeau,
> > >> >>>> James Taylor, Jake Luciani, Parth Chandra, Alex Levenson,
Marcel
> > >> >>>> Kornacker,
> > >> >>>> Steven Phillips, Hanifi Gunes, Wes McKinney, Jason Altekruse,
David
> > >> >>>> Alves,
> > >> >>>> Zain Asgar, Ippokratis Pandis, Abdel Hakim Deneche, Reynold
Xin.
> > >> >>>> [2]
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=0
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=0>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> --
> > >> >>> Alex Levenson
> > >> >>> @THISWILLWORK
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Julien
> 
> 


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message