Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-flink-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-flink-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F237611D69 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 21:16:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 21059 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2014 21:16:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-flink-dev-archive@flink.apache.org Received: (qmail 20999 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2014 21:16:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flink.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@flink.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@flink.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 20975 invoked by uid 99); 15 Aug 2014 21:16:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 21:16:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gates@hortonworks.com designates 209.85.220.45 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.45] (HELO mail-pa0-f45.google.com) (209.85.220.45) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 21:16:23 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id eu11so4111419pac.4 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:16:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=NZm//0US/BvgRrHnsEScghYk3fF4m88/1qlAnjOCDuY=; b=YUf+q/xc3hBtjJV0nZI4+ChOLYJjk92/g1w5KrVTfs1rlV6rzgIQQNzfejvNrSqVv2 EVZ00NzUBkI7EvhdRx2f80f8iheENnbDxG5JTZRCfDuyaPvaIsjSPq9dajncO0wvu1X8 0bY61t3SPbFo7CmjeD/YjanpLheaPPMMO+YumrGEY7D4UzECw7uAGKTapFqyaiElYcyf R4Ebh8g9rjBBhtaDZkRxAmMQalyJK+YSHpKtGPJOKrcQOnKIxrTT5fk0EMPRRzm+Zi3a bqyKDNhLdmSEWvuur0XJvM1xzqLpflDod2PCvYe/x87a2WBqfiix9GfzUyii3Y8F+vtb M8rw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQknA7j91WY/PqzblAg+xF/XBYKvuw0lHXPJce74Xnu/y4VDgPDzB8i25JpPobZotZqYWsstWOQYlUPFCRZJc9MLfq6Rz+97YwrpM5CemeLloYsLwiQ= X-Received: by 10.68.87.225 with SMTP id bb1mr15501038pbb.89.1408137361500; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Alan-Gatess-MacBook-Pro.local (c-76-103-170-145.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [76.103.170.145]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ey10sm13341540pdb.50.2014.08.15.14.15.59 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:16:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53EE788D.1060306@hortonworks.com> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:15:57 -0700 From: Alan Gates User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.11 (Macintosh/20140602) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@flink.incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Question on providing CDH packages References: <53EE4260.9030702@hortonworks.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="------------010507090501050806060704" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --------------010507090501050806060704 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080109030702030102040901" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080109030702030102040901 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sorry, apparently this was unclear, as others asked the same question. Flink hasn't had any Apache releases yet. I was referring to the proposed release that Robert sent out, http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-0.6-incubating-rc7/ Alan. > Sean Owen > August 15, 2014 at 11:26 AM > PS, sorry for being dense, but I don't see vendor packages at > http://flink.incubator.apache.org/downloads.html ? > > Is it this page? > http://flink.incubator.apache.org/docs/0.6-SNAPSHOT/building.html > > That's more benign, just helping people rebuild for certain distros if > desired. Can the example be generified to refer to a fictional "ACME > Distribution"? But a note here and there about gotchas building for > certain versions and combos seems reasonable. > > I also find this bit in the build script, although vendor-specific, is > a small nice convenience for users: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/blob/master/pom.xml#L195 > Owen O'Malley > August 15, 2014 at 11:01 AM > As a mentor, I agree that vendor specific packages aren't appropriate for > the Apache site. (Disclosure: I work at Hortonworks.) Working with the > vendors to make packages available is great, but they shouldn't be hosted > at Apache. > > .. Owen > > > > Sean Owen > August 15, 2014 at 10:32 AM > I hope not surprisingly, I agree. (Backstory: I am at Cloudera.) I > have for example lobbied Spark to remove CDH-specific releases and > build profiles. Not just for this reason, but because it is often > unnecessary to have vendor-specific builds, and also just increases > maintenance overhead for the project. > > Matei et al say they want to make it as easy as possible to consume > Spark, and so provide vendor-build-specific artifacts and such here > and there. To be fair, Spark tries to support a large range of Hadoop > and YARN versions, and getting the right combination of profiles and > versions right to recreate a vendor release was kind of hard until > about Hadoop 2.2 (stable YARN really). > > I haven't heard of any formal policy. I would ask whether there are > similar reasons to produce pre-packaged releases like so? > > Alan Gates > August 15, 2014 at 10:24 AM > Let me begin by noting that I obviously have a conflict of interest > since my company is a direct competitor to Cloudera. But as a mentor > and Apache member I believe I need to bring this up. > > What is the Apache policy towards having a vendor specific package on > a download site? It is strange to me to come to Flink's website and > see packages for Flink with CDH (or HDP or MapR or whatever). We > should avoid providing vendor specific packages. It gives the > appearance of preferring one vendor over another, which Apache does > not want to do. > > I have no problem at all with Cloudera hosting a CDH specific package > of Flink, nor with Flink project members working with Cloudera to > create such a package. But I do not think they should be hosted at > Apache. > > Alan. -- Sent with Postbox -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You. --------------080109030702030102040901 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sorry, apparently this wa= s unclear, as others asked the same question.=C2=A0 Flink hasn't had any=20 Apache releases yet.=C2=A0 I was referring to the proposed release that=20 Robert sent out,=20 http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-0.6-= incubating-rc7/

Alan.

Sean Owen = =20 August 15, 2014= =20 at 11:26 AM
PS, sorry for being dense= , but I don't see vendor packages at
http://flink.incub= ator.apache.org/downloads.html ?

Is it this page?
http://fli= nk.incubator.apache.org/docs/0.6-SNAPSHOT/building.html

That's more benign, just helping people rebuild for certain distros if
desired= . Can the example be generified to refer to a fictional "ACME
Distributio= n"? But a note here and there about gotchas building for
certain=20 versions and combos seems reasonable.

I also find this bit in the build script, although vendor-specific, is
a small nice convenience=20 for users:
https://github.com/apache= /incubator-flink/blob/master/pom.xml#L195
Owen O'Malley = =20 August 15, 2014= =20 at 11:01 AM
As a mentor, I agree that= =20 vendor specific packages aren't appropriate for
the Apache site.=20 (Disclosure: I work at Hortonworks.) Working with the
vendors to make packages available is great, but they shouldn't be hosted
at Apache.
.. Owen



Sean Owen = =20 August 15, 2014= =20 at 10:32 AM
I hope not surprisingly, = I agree. (Backstory: I am at Cloudera.) I
have for example lobbied=20 Spark to remove CDH-specific releases and
build profiles. Not just=20 for this reason, but because it is often
unnecessary to have=20 vendor-specific builds, and also just increases
maintenance overhead=20 for the project.

Matei et al say they want to make it as easy as=20 possible to consume
Spark, and so provide vendor-build-specific=20 artifacts and such here
and there. To be fair, Spark tries to support a large range of Hadoop
and YARN versions, and getting the right=20 combination of profiles and
versions right to recreate a vendor=20 release was kind of hard until
about Hadoop 2.2 (stable YARN really).
I haven't heard of any formal policy. I would ask whether there are
simil= ar reasons to produce pre-packaged releases like so?

Alan Gates = =20 August 15, 2014= =20 at 10:24 AM
Let me begin by noting that I obviously have a conflict of interest=20 since my company is a direct competitor to Cloudera.=C2=A0 But as a mentor= =20 and Apache member I believe I need to bring this up.=C2=A0

What is the Apache policy towards having a vendor specific package on a=20 download site?=C2=A0 It is strange to me to come to Flink's website and see= =20 packages for Flink with CDH (or HDP or MapR or whatever).=C2=A0 We should= =20 avoid providing vendor specific packages.=C2=A0 It gives the appearance of= =20 preferring one vendor over another, which Apache does not want to do.

I have no problem at all with Cloudera hosting a CDH specific package of Flink, nor with Flink project members working with Cloudera to create=20 such a package.=C2=A0 But I do not think they should be hosted at Apache.
Alan.
=20

--
Sent with Postbox

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is = intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed a= nd may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from= disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the = intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dis= semination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is= strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, ple= ase contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank Yo= u. --------------080109030702030102040901-- --------------010507090501050806060704--