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

Switch to Threaded View
Hive >> mail # dev >> [DISCUSS] HCatalog becoming a subproject of Hive

Copy link to this message
Re: [DISCUSS] HCatalog becoming a subproject of Hive
I don’t agree with the proposal. It is impractical to have a Hcat committer
with commit access to Hcat only portions of Hive. We cannot guarantee that
a Hcat
committer will become a Hive committer in 6-9 months, that depends on what
they do
in the next 6-9 months.

The current Hcat committers should spend more time in reviewing patches,
work on non-Hcat areas in Hive, and then gradually become a hive
committer. They should not be given any preferential treatment, and the
process should be same as it would be for any other hive contributor
currently. Given that the expertise of the Hcat committers, they should
be inline for becoming a hive committer if they continue to work in hive,
but that cannot be guaranteed. I agree that some Hive committers should try
and help the existing Hcat patches, and again that is voluntary and
committers cannot be assigned to different parts of the code.


On 12/20/12 1:03 AM, "Carl Steinbach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Alan's proposal sounds like a good idea to me.
>On Dec 18, 2012 5:36 PM, "Travis Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Alan, I think your proposal sounds great.
>> --travis
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Alan Gates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Carl, speaking just for myself and not as a representative of the HCat
>> PPMC at this point, I am coming to agree with you that HCat integrating
>> with Hive fully makes more sense.
>> >
>> > However, this makes the committer question even thornier.  Travis and
>> Namit, I think the shepherd proposal needs to lay out a clear and time
>> bounded path to committership for HCat committers.  Having HCat
>> as second class Hive citizens for the long run will not be healthy.  I
>> propose the following as a starting point for discussion:
>> >
>> > All active HCat committers (those who have contributed or committed a
>> patch in the last 6 months) will be made committers in the HCat portion
>> only of Hive.  In addition those committers will be assigned a
>> shepherd who is a current Hive committer and who will be responsible for
>> mentoring them towards full Hive committership.  As a part of this
>> mentorship the HCat committer will review patches of other contributors,
>> contribute patches to Hive (both inside and outside of HCatalog),
>> to user issues on the mailing lists, etc.  It is intended that as a
>> of this mentorship program HCat committers can become full Hive
>> in 6-9 months.  No new HCat only committers will be elected in Hive
>> this.  All Hive committers will automatically also have commit rights on
>> HCatalog.
>> >
>> > Alan.
>> >
>> > On Dec 14, 2012, at 10:05 AM, Carl Steinbach wrote:
>> >
>> >> On a functional level I don't think there is going to be much of a
>> >> difference between the subproject option proposed by Travis and the
>> other
>> >> option where HCatalog becomes a TLP. In both cases HCatalog and Hive
>> will
>> >> have separate committers, separate code repositories, separate
>> >> cycles, and separate project roadmaps. Aside from ASF bureaucracy, I
>> think
>> >> the only major difference between the two options is that the
>> >> route will give the rest of the community the false impression that
>> two
>> >> projects have coordinated roadmaps and a process to prevent
>> >> functionality from appearing in both projects. Consequently, If these
>> are
>> >> the only two options then I would prefer that HCatalog become a TLP.
>> >>
>> >> On the other hand, I also agree with many of the sentiments that have
>> >> already been expressed in this thread, namely that the two projects
>> >> closely related and that it would benefit the community at large if
>> two
>> >> projects could be brought closer together. Up to this point the major
>> >> source of pain for the HCatalog team has been the frequent necessity
>> >