hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <ste...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Shall we adopt the "Defining Hadoop" page
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:44:12 GMT
On 15/06/11 17:23, Eli Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Allen Wittenauer<aw@apache.org>  wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 14, 2011, at 6:45 PM, Eli Collins wrote:
>>> Are we really going to go after all the web companies that patch in an
>>> enhancement to their current Hadoop build and tell them to stop saying
>>> that they are using Hadoop?  You've patched Hadoop many times, should
>>> your employer not be able to say they use Hadoop?  I'm -1 on a
>>> proposal that does this.
>>
>>         I think there is a big difference between some company that uses Hadoop with
some patches internally and a company that puts out a distribution for others to use, usually
for-profit.
>
> The wiki makes no such distinction. The PMC will apply the rules
> equally to all parties.
>
> According to Owen's email if you are using a release of Apache Hadoop
> and have applied more than 2 security patches or any backports you are
> not using Hadoop.
>
> Thanks,
> Eli

What you do in house is of no concern to the trademarks and PMC people, 
but naming of public redistributables is -and that's where the confusion 
of what "a distribution of Apache Hadoop" is, because it's gone from 
weakly defined to very vague recently, and that needs to be corrected 
before people are left in a world of confusion.


It's been complicated enough with people posting issues related to the 
Cloudera Distribution including Apache Hadoop, what happens when people 
start posting EMC-enterprise-hadoopish issues, file bugreps against 
Brisk's "Hadoop built on other things" product on the apache JIRA?

Mime
View raw message