incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] - Packages renaming and backward compatibility (was: Re: [VOTE] Graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator)
Date Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:44:57 GMT
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Has nothing to do with incubation. You're talking about Foundation-wide
>> policy. You cannot impose different naming rules on podlings, than what is
>> imposed on TLPs. Please see my response in the original thread. You need a
>> Board resolution and rationale.
>>
>>
> I'm glad you phrased it like this. It totally takes us out of the scope of
> the perceived problem. As you say you have to apply the same rules until
> policies change, if they change. You're amazingly cogent dude! It's a
> strong argument that I can't disagree with even though I am convinced the
> perceived problem is quite serious.
>
> I'll withdraw my veto on the other VOTE thread but I really want to
> evaluate this in this discussion thread.
>
>
OK to get back on track with this discussion I've taken a snippet from the
original thread and pasted it here:


>> They remain.
>>
>> Keeping them is the right thing for our community and product. That is our
>> determination, and is our Right.
>>
>>
> Sorry but I don't think that's right.
>
>
>> Sqoop has determined backwards compatibility is important to their
>> community and wants to keep this (deprecated) interface for a while. So
>> where is the problem here, people?
>>
>>
> It's fine but those com.cloudera packages don't need to be hosted here.
> They can be hosted elsewhere and the backwards compatibility issue can
> still be handled.
>
>
>> Really. What is the problem with the extra interfaces?
>>
>>
> The package namespace is not ours. It's that simple G.
>
>
>> There is no legal (trademark or copyright) problem that I'm aware of.
>> There
>> is no technical problem that I'm aware of.
>
>
> OK do we have the right to create any kind of package or class under
> com.cloudera (or any other companies packages)?
>

I'd like to approach it by answering this question. Because if we look at
it like this then we'll start seeing the issues this could cause.

-- 
Best Regards,
-- Alex

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message