drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Altekruse <altekruseja...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Naming the new ValueVector Initiative
Date Thu, 17 Dec 2015 02:21:43 GMT
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> 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>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Wes, that's great!
>> On Dec 14, 2015 9:44 AM, "Wes McKinney" <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
>> >
>> > 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>
>> wrote:
>> > > I've opened a name search for our top vote getter.
>> > >
>> > > 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
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Just added my vote.
>> > >>
>> > >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Wes McKinney <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
>> >
>> > >> > 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>
>> > >> >> 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>
>> > 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,
and
>> > fill
>> > >> >>>> out
>> > >> >>>> column C in the spreadsheet.
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> Julian
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> [1] https://github.com/stephenh/joist
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jacques Nadeau <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
>> >
>> > >> >>>> 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>
>> > >> >>>> 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
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/
>> .
>> > >> >>>> 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
>> > >
>> > >> >>>> wrote:
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jacques Nadeau <
>> > 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
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> thanks
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> --
>> > >> >>>> Jacques Nadeau
>> > >> >>>> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Jacques Nadeau <
>> > 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
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> 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>
>> > >> >>>> 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>
>> > >> >>>> wrote:
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> Single vote for most preferred?
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> Single transferable vote?
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Jacques Nadeau <
>> > 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
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> 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
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> --
>> > >> >>> Alex Levenson
>> > >> >>> @THISWILLWORK
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Julien
>

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