hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bernd Fondermann <bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Abandon hdfsproxy HDFS contrib
Date Thu, 17 Feb 2011 12:43:47 GMT
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 09:18, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2011, at 2:28 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 07:33, Ian Holsman <hadoop@holsman.net> wrote:
>>> They probably have patched it, and mistakenly forgot to submit them.. any chance
of doing a diff on your version and submitting it?
>> Please keep in mind: The original author(s) would need to submit it -
>> not a proxy.
> No, anyone with permission of the copyright owner can submit it
> if it is a separately copyrightable work.  If it is just a repair,
> then anyone can submit it, since repairs are not copyrightable.
> The original author should be noted in any credit given for the
> fix.

We have the very unfortunate situation here at Hadoop where Apache
Hadoop is not the primary and foremost place of Hadoop development.
Instead, code is developed internally at Yahoo and then contributed in
(smaller or larger) chunks to Hadoop.
This is open source development upside down.
It is not ok for people to diff ASF svn against their internal code
and provide the diff as a patch without reviewing IP first for every
line of code changed.
For larger chunks I'd suggest to even go via the Incubator IP clearance process.
Only then will we force committers to primarily work here in the open
and return to what I'd consider a healthy project.

To be honest: Hadoop is in the process of falling apart.
Contrib Code gets moved out of Apache instead of being maintained here.
Discussions are seldom consense-driven.
Release branches stagnate.
Downstream projects like HBase don't get proper support.
Production setups are made from 3rd party distributions.
Development is not happening here, but elsewhere behind corporate doors.
Discussion about future developments are started on corporate blogs (
) instead of on the proper mailing list.
Hurdles for committing are way too high.
On the bright side, new committers and PMC members are added, this is
an improvement.

I'd suggest to move away from relying on large code dumps from
corporations, and move back to the ASF-proven "individual committer
commits on trunk"-model where more committers can get involved.
If that means not to support high end cluster sizes for some months,
well, so be it. Average committers cannot run - e.g. test - on high
end cluster sizes. If that would mean they cannot participate, then
the open source project better concentrate on small and medium sized
cluster instead.


View raw message