hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Amr Awadallah <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Proposal for making core Hadoop changes
Date Sat, 22 May 2010 02:26:23 GMT
 > Does adapting the PEP and its workflow to our projects, community and 
bylaws seem reasonable?

+1

On 5/21/2010 1:42 PM, Eli Collins wrote:
> As HDFS and MapReduce have matured the cost and complexity of
> introducing features has grown. Each new feature has to consider
> interactions with a growing set of existing features, a growing user
> base (upgrades, backwards compatibility) and additional use cases
> (more and more projects now build on them). At the same time we don't
> want the high bar for contribution to unnecessarily hinder new
> development and releases.
>
> Many projects at a similar stage address this by adopting a more
> formal way to describe, socialize and shepherd enhancements to their
> platforms. Today, new features are often discussed via an umbrella
> jira, which may have an attached design document. There are a number
> of issues with this approach. The design documents vary in format and
> quality, and are often reviewed by a limited audience. They aren't
> version controlled. Sometimes the proposal is only partially
> specified. Jiras are often ignored. Understanding a proposal and it's
> implications through a series of threads in the jira comments is
> difficult. It's hard for contributors and users to find these
> top-level jiras and follow their status.
>
> I'd like to propose that core Hadoop adopts something similar to
> Python's PEP (Python Enhancement Proposal) [1]. A "HEP" would be a
> single primary mechanism for proposing new features, incorporating
> community feedback, and recording decisions. The author of the HEP
> would be responsible for building consensus and moving the feature
> forward. Similarly, some subset of the community would be responsible
> for reviewing HEPs in a timely manner and identifying missing pieces
> in the proposal. Discussion would occur before patches showed up on
> jira. People interested in the core Hadoop roadmap could keep an eye
> on the HEPs without the overhead of following jira traffic.
>
> Why base this on the PEP? The format has proven useful to a
> substantial existing project, and I think the workflow is not too
> heavy-weight, and well-suited to a community such as ours. That being
> said, we could discuss other models (eg Java's JSR).
>
> Before we get into specifics, is this something the community would
> like to adopt in some form? Does adapting the PEP and its workflow to
> our projects, community and bylaws seem reasonable?
>
> Thanks,
> Eli
>
> 1. http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001
>    

Mime
View raw message