Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-general-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 47880 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2010 18:41:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 19 Aug 2010 18:41:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 66494 invoked by uid 500); 19 Aug 2010 18:41:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-general-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 66406 invoked by uid 500); 19 Aug 2010 18:41:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 66398 invoked by uid 99); 19 Aug 2010 18:41:40 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:41:40 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of saint.ack@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.48] (HELO mail-ww0-f48.google.com) (74.125.82.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:41:17 +0000 Received: by wwb34 with SMTP id 34so2471157wwb.29 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:40:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=ZdEtOrZmc+kj69Ejgify9RHmVYEUGcU/0RJCnGsY5uI=; b=VGd07q5ORExf6caGEpKhjpXkPK4t0rIJ7WzIyUCGzsHZgWm7KBPyxxXnyhR7gOS2hP 3Vbo//HsKjKPwncU9OWEX+8Moe3d+ZS5VaygAyRrzgPry2A/X6wcBxyOm2HdWtraLIG9 F+lTCe8hvjiVvNE6SRWqp8fqcITIglt/QG/Ko= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=Bt74OiSuocLXShzRLB/SACQMkJ9FrHnootWKNL3VmhetmuX7Xj4O6+LHB+V0NJAc8j 2s7y/FzOFl5OzF8GQxNFOHQ7YurzYWmntkDhm3A5Uv9f1Luej0gt50Up/DlZDsGwkfJv 2EcdRGakEdVO0WgCyCvVPYkpeoFKkH0LHDMVI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.133.148 with SMTP id f20mr233709wbt.35.1282243257226; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:40:57 -0700 (PDT) Sender: saint.ack@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.168.73 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:40:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7962BB4E-7176-44EB-A708-64881639E2AF@apache.org> References: <7962BB4E-7176-44EB-A708-64881639E2AF@apache.org> Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:40:57 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: YRKnS9um1C2B9-7LTbt5d3B0IL4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] Should we define the Common committers as HDFS + MapReduce committers? From: Stack To: general@hadoop.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org +1 On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > Since the project split, it is mostly required that any MapReduce or HDFS > committers have access to change Common. We haven't had any cases where we > wanted to nominate any one for just Common. Toward the goal of simplifying > the structure, I'd propose that we define the Common committers as precisely > the union of the HDFS committers and MapReduce committers. > > Clearly, I'm +1. > > -- Owen >