Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-general-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-general-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 796DD98E7 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:00:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 24419 invoked by uid 500); 31 Aug 2012 16:00:51 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-general-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 24194 invoked by uid 500); 31 Aug 2012 16:00:51 -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 24185 invoked by uid 99); 31 Aug 2012 16:00:51 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:00:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-lpp01m010-f48.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username cutting, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:00:51 +0000 Received: by lagr15 with SMTP id r15so2714589lag.35 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:00:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.86.169 with SMTP id q9mr2758884lbz.65.1346428849481; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.128.201 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:00:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <787D4C46-699F-48E9-BFB2-C0C46DD3AE92@jpl.nasa.gov> References: <787D4C46-699F-48E9-BFB2-C0C46DD3AE92@jpl.nasa.gov> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:00:49 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Spin out MR, HDFS and YARN as their own TLPs and disband Hadoop umbrella project From: Doug Cutting To: general@hadoop.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > I am saying that the current members of the Apache Software Foundation's Hadoop > Project Management Committee exhibit the characteristics (not just during > discrete events; it's been happening for a long time) of folks who in reality > shouldn't belong to the same project management committee. Note: this is > NOT a bad thing. There are probably plenty of (sub-)sets of groups at Apache > and elsewhere that folks wouldn't fit in to. I've enumerated some of > those characteristics that you can see sometimes spill over > (meta thought discussions about moving things around; or drawing arbitrary > lines around pieces of code that really have nothing to do with technical > stuff, and more to do about insulating and control;), Hadoop's community is not perfect. But the divisions in the community are not primarily aligned with subcomponent boundaries. A project split will thus not likely fix the majority of these community imperfections. It may fix some, but ought to be pursued carefully so that it doesn't cause more harm than good. > but there are also other > concerns such as frameworks put in to place (exclusivity amongst others) > that themselves are pretty high indicators that this is an umbrella project. The partitioning of committers has now been removed in a separate vote. Hadoop is not a classic umbrella project. Doug