hawq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Zhanwei Wang <wan...@apache.org>
Subject Re: libhdfs3 development is still going on outside of ASF
Date Thu, 15 Sep 2016 04:51:54 GMT
> But my concern is the current users of libhdfs3 and all the pull requests,
> wiki docs and issues. Another uncertain aspect from my perspective is that
> although HAWQ could not run without libhdfs3, libhdfs3 could be used in
> other open source projects, that might be the true meaning of making
> libhdfs3 open source at the beginning.


That’s what I concern about. Think about others before we take actions. Users already show
there frustration HAWQ-1046. 

libhdfs3 open source as independent project before Apache HAWQ was born. People contribute
to it before Apache HAWQ was born. And I do not think they all sign the contribution license
with ASF. 

When Apache HAWQ start incubating, libhdfs3 is not part of it, HAWQ users should build and
install libhdfs3 as other third parties    before build Apache HAWQ. See the commit https://github.com/apache/incubator-hawq/commit/8b26974cd8d6e1d824f274eb4a68f950fd94156c
<https://github.com/apache/incubator-hawq/commit/8b26974cd8d6e1d824f274eb4a68f950fd94156c>


I really do not mind who govern it and follow what kind process. I care about what troubles
to libhdfs3’s users will be introduced if we drop libhdfs3’s repository.  Please note
HAWQ is not the only user.

Import libhdfs3 into HAWQ also introduce trouble to HAWQ.  The commit to libhdfs3 probably
not related to HAWQ, but it will interfere with HAWQ.  HAWQ should not always keep the latest
development version of libhdfs3. The stable version of libhdfs3 is best for HAWQ. If we import
libhdfs3 into HAWQ, we have to schedule the release process both HAWQ and libhdfs3. And libhdfs3
commit may break HAWQ severely.

What benefit of deleting libhdfs3’s repository except ASF declare its governance (I also
doubt if libhdfs3 is included in the HAWQ donation license, but it is ok to me it is governed
by ASF)?  In my opinion it only introduce trouble to libhdfs3’s users and HAWQ. 

Keep current status (make libhdfs3 as third party dependency and copy it stable version to
HAWQ) is best for HAWQ.




Best Regards

Zhanwei Wang
wangzw@apache.org



> 在 2016年9月15日,上午10:54,Hong Wu <xunzhangthu@gmail.com> 写道:
> 
> In my opinion, I think it is reasonable to transfer the third-party repo of
> libhdfs3 totally into HAWQ, not only for the convenience of HAWQ build, but
> also for the consideration of ASF project. So for HAWQ project, I am with
> Roman.
> 
> But my concern is the current users of libhdfs3 and all the pull requests,
> wiki docs and issues. Another uncertain aspect from my perspective is that
> although HAWQ could not run without libhdfs3, libhdfs3 could be used in
> other open source projects, that might be the true meaning of making
> libhdfs3 open source at the beginning.
> 
> In summary, if it is really against the spirit of a ASF project for HAWQ, a
> suggested way might be marking original libhdfs3 repo as a legacy repo in
> stead of remove it.
> 
> Best
> Hong
> 
> 2016-09-15 10:04 GMT+08:00 Zhanwei Wang <wangzw@apache.org>:
> 
>> Currently libhdfs3’s official code is not the same as in HAWQ. Some new
>> code does not copy into HAWQ.  I do not think code change of libhdfs3
>> should follow HAWQ’s commit process because  many change are not related to
>> HAWQ.
>> 
>> From HAWQ side, I suggest to keep the stable version of its third-party
>> libraries and copy new libhdfs3’s code only when it is necessary.
>> 
>> libhdfs3 was open source years before HAWQ incubating with a separated
>> permission of its authority. So in my opinion it is a third party and it
>> actually was a third party before HAWQ incubating. And HAWQ is not the only
>> user.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best Regards
>> 
>> Zhanwei Wang
>> wangzw@apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 在 2016年9月15日,上午9:35,Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>
写道:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Zhanwei Wang <wangzw@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi Roman
>>>> 
>>>> libhdfs3 works as third-party library of HAWQ, Just for the convenience
>> of HAWQ release
>>>> process we copy its code into HAWQ.  The reason is that HAWQ used to
>> dependent on
>>>> specific version of libhdfs3 and libhdfs3 only distribute as source
>> code and the build process is complicated.
>>> 
>>> I actually don't buy this argument. libhdfs3 is not an optional
>>> dependency for HAWQ
>>> like ORCA is (for example). Without libhdfs3 there's pretty tough to
>>> imagine HAWQ.
>>> As such the code base needs to be governed as part of the ASF project,
>>> not a random
>>> GitHub dependency.
>>> 
>>> IOW, let me ask you this: were all the changes that went into libhdfs3
>>> that is part of
>>> HAWQ discussed and reviewed via the ASF development process or did you
>> just
>>> import them from time to time as this comment suggests:
>>>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-1046?
>> focusedCommentId=15489669&page=com.atlassian.jira.
>> plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15489669
>>> ?
>>> 
>>>> I do not think we have any reason to shutdown a third party’s official
>> repository.
>>> 
>>> You say 3d party as though its not just you guys maintaining it on the
>> side.
>>> 
>>>> We also copy google test source code into HAWQ, just as what we did for
>> libhdfs3.
>>> 
>>> But this is very different. You don't do any development (certainly
>>> you don't do any
>>> non-trivial development) of that code.
>>> 
>>>> libhdfs3 open source under Apache license version 2 just the same as
>> HAWQ. So I believe there is no license issue.
>>> 
>>> You're correct. There's no licensing issue but there's a pretty
>> significant
>>> governance issue.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Roman.
>>> 
>> 
>> 


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