incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mohammad Nour El-Din <nour.moham...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] - Packages renaming and backward compatibility (was: Re: [VOTE] Graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator)
Date Wed, 29 Feb 2012 12:33:52 GMT
Yes I did, and thanks for clarification :), and please read my as well :).
Thanks.

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:15 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.
>
> -g
> On Feb 29, 2012 5:03 AM, "Mohammad Nour El-Din" <nour.mohammad@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I don't see that this getting to any clear end yet. So I suggest that we
> > take this from a Sqoop instance to be a discussion on rules them selves.
> >
> > I would like to start a [VOTE] about whether it is a *must* for podlings
> to
> > rename all packages before being a TLP or not over keeping the old
> package
> > names for backward compatibility. What ever the consensus going to be
> built
> > we definitely need to update the Incubator documents to clear this kind
> of
> > issue. But before starting the vote I would like to consider others'
> > opinions.
> >
> > Thoughts ?
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
> > > > <nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On the other hand, I totally respect that Cloudera's interest to
> > > support
> > > > > their customers and provide backword compatibility, but this is
> *not*
> > > the
> > > > > point at all, the point is this *should* not, and even allow me to
> > say
> > > > this
> > > > > is *must* not be the problem of Apache, and yes I agree with the
> > > opinion
> > > > > that this is a matter to be decided by Sqoop team but not to make
> > > > Apache's
> > > > > problem. So also let not get more into this!!!
> > > >
> > > > Or course this is Apache's problem. You can't have your cake and eat
> > > > it too. If you accept code for a project you accept the community as
> > > > well. Say Apache accepts a project like Open Office, should we ignore
> > > > the existing community and not concern ourselves with backward
> > > > compatibility for that project as well, because the original code
> > > > wasn't birthed at Apache?
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a very slippery slope. Maybe some projects get way too much
> leeway
> > > because of the big flashing lights. Regardless of how big the press
> > > headlines are all projects should be held to the same standard.
> > >
> > > No project should be allowed to graduate without solving all issues
> > > pertaining to marks. It's a failure of the incubator in the past for
> > > allowing other projects to do so. I'm shocked it was allowed.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > > -- Alex
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> > ----
> > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> moving"
> > - Albert Einstein
> >
>



-- 
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

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