Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop, mail # general - Hadoop Java Versions


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Hadoop Java Versions
Eric Baldeschwieler 2011-07-13, 14:59
We could create an apache hadoop list of product selection discussions.  I believe this list is intended to be focused on project governance and similar discussions.  Maybe we should simply create a governance list and leave this one to be the free for all?

On Jul 2, 2011, at 9:16 PM, Ian Holsman wrote:

>
> On Jul 2, 2011, at 7:38 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Abhishek Mehta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>> open and honest conversations on this thread/group, irrespective of
>>> whether one represents a company or apache, should be encouraged.
>>>
>>
>> Paradoxically, I partially agree with Ian on this.  On the one hand, it is
>> important to hear about alternatives in the same eco-system (and alternative
>> approaches from other communities).  That is a bit different from Ian's
>> view.
>
> While I don't mind that technical alternatives get discussed, I do get PO'd when
> the conversation goes into why product X is better than Y, or when someone makes claims that are incorrect because some 'customer' told them and stuff like that.
>
> If we can keep it at architecture/approaches instead of why a certain product is better than go right ahead.
>
>>
>> Where I agree with him is that discussions should not be in the form of
>> simple breast beating.  Discussions should be driven by data and experience.
>> All data and experience are of equal value if they represent quality
>> thought.  The only place that company names should figure in this is as a
>> bookmark so you can tell which product/release has the characteristic under
>> consideration.
>>
>>
>>> ... And in that sense we all owe ASF and the hadoop community (and not any
>>> one company) an equal amount of gratitude, humility and respect.
>>>
>>
>> This doesn't get said nearly enough.
>