Hi, looking at the derivation of the 0.23.x & 2.0.x branches on one
hand, and the 1.x branches on the other, as described here:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-user/201301.mbox/%3CCD0CAB8B.1098F%25evans%40yahoo-inc.com%3E

One gets the impression the Hadoop committers are split into two teams,
with one team working on 0.23.x/2.0.2 and another team working on 1.x,
running the risk of increasingly diverging products eventually competing
with each other.  Is that the case?  Is there expected to be a Hadoop
3.0 where the results of the two lines of development will merge or is
it increasingly likely the subteams will continue their separate routes?

Thanks,
Glen

--
Glen Mazza
Talend Community Coders - coders.talend.com
blog: www.jroller.com/gmazza

It might also be helpful to differentiate between what commercial entities
might do with release lines in ASF Hadoop and the relationship between the
branches within ASF Hadoop itself. ASF Hadoop 1 and ASF Hadoop 2 are two
versions of the same product, they do not compete with each other.

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:48 AM, Glen Mazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> One gets the impression the Hadoop committers are split into two teams,
> with one team working on 0.23.x/2.0.2 and another team working on 1.x,
> running the risk of increasingly diverging products eventually competing
> with each other.

--
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

The policy should be stated :-)  It is:  "All new features must be
committed to trunk before or simultaneously with being committed to a
lower-numbered branch."

Thus, we don't forbid new features from being added to the Hadoop-1 branch,
but they must be back-ports of features already added to trunk/Hadoop-2.

Hadoop-1 continues to live because it is very stable and the community
needs time to stabilize the great new major features in Hadoop-2.  But most
of us are looking forward to moving to Hadoop-2 when it is ready.  By
keeping Hadoop-1 in good shape in the meantime, we assure that the
transition can be smooth and reasonably comfortable for the end-user
companies that depend on Hadoop for business-critical use.

--Matt
Hadoop-1 release manager
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Absolutely not true.
>
> We have a clear policy in place which ensures there is no feature
> disparity between hadoop-1 and hadoop-2. So, hadoop-2 is a super-set of
> functionality in hadoop-1 and there is no disparity.
>
> hth,
> Arun
>
> On Jan 18, 2013, at 6:48 AM, Glen Mazza wrote:
>
>  Hi, looking at the derivation of the 0.23.x & 2.0.x branches on one hand,
> and the 1.x branches on the other, as described here:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-user/201301.mbox/%3CCD0CAB8B.1098F%25evans%40yahoo-inc.com%3E
>
> One gets the impression the Hadoop committers are split into two teams,
> with one team working on 0.23.x/2.0.2 and another team working on 1.x,
> running the risk of increasingly diverging products eventually competing
> with each other.  Is that the case?  Is there expected to be a Hadoop 3.0
> where the results of the two lines of development will merge or is it
> increasingly likely the subteams will continue their separate routes?
>
> Thanks,
> Glen
>
> --
> Glen Mazza
> Talend Community Coders - coders.talend.com
> blog: www.jroller.com/gmazza
>
>
>  --
> Arun C. Murthy
> Hortonworks Inc.
> http://hortonworks.com/
>
>
>