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

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop >> mail # general >> LimitedPrivate and HBase

Copy link to this message
Re: LimitedPrivate and HBase

On Jun 6, 2011, at 6:08 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
>>       Let's face it: this happened because it was HBase.  If it was almost
>> anyone else, it would have sat there.... and *that's* the point where I'm
>> mainly concerned.
> If you want to feel better, take a look at HDFS-941, HDFS-347, and HDFS-918
> - these are patches that HBase has been asking for for nearly 2 years in
> some cases and haven't gone in. Satisfied?

These cases don't appear to be about re-classification of an API from private to semi-public.  So no, I'm not.  None of these appear to answer the base set of question:

- What is the real criteria for changing an API from private to limited?
- How "closely related" does a project need to be to get this privilege?

(Yes, I've read the classification docs.  That's too vague.)

I can tell you feel I'm picking on HBase, especially in light of my flat out rejection of the "we want to mmap() blocks" case.  But if this reclassification had been with anything else outside of the Hadoop project, I would have asked the same thing.  It raises important questions that we as a project need to answer.