Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add
more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and
in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG
team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

+1

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add

more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and

in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG

team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add

more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and

in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG

team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

My vote is -1

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:38 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add

more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and

in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG

team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

Raghu is PMC member and as such already has committer rights to all
subprojects. So we are not breaking any new grounds here. The reasoning
is the same as for creating branches for Pig multiquery work that we did
in Pig.

Olga

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:39 PM
To: Santhosh Srinivasan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

My vote is -1

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:38 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add

more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and

in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG

team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

+1
On 8/18/09 7:11 AM, "Olga Natkovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> +1
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>
>
> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>
> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
> Hadoop applications.
>
> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add
>
> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and
>
> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>
> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>
> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG
>
> team.
>
> Thanks,
> Raghu.

----------------------
Yiping Han
F-3140
(408)349-4403
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Its good to know that Raghu Angadi is a PMC member and that he has
committer rights to all subprojects. That's besides the point.

The example of a branch for multi-query is not quite right. Multi-query
was part of the pig development efforts and not a contrib project.

Raghu is suggesting that he will be the first of many more committers.
If that's the case then Zebra is clearly better off being a subproject
under Hadoop. That way, Raghu need to ask for permission and the Pig
team need not deal with committers for a contrib project.

Tomorrow, there will be requests from other contrib projects for similar
reasons. I don't see this as a good enough reason to grant committer
rights to contrib projects.

Santhosh
-----Original Message-----
From: Olga Natkovich
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Santhosh Srinivasan
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Raghu is PMC member and as such already has committer rights to all
subprojects. So we are not breaking any new grounds here. The reasoning
is the same as for creating branches for Pig multiquery work that we did
in Pig.

Olga

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:39 PM
To: Santhosh Srinivasan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

My vote is -1

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:38 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add

more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and

in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG

team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

IANAC, but my (non-binding) vote is also -1. I think all the improvements
and feature addition to zebra should be available through pig trunk. The
codebase is not big enough to justify creating a branch. If the reason is
Pig's dependence on a checked in hadoop jar, the shims proposal by Dmitry
should be taken up asap, so that those who want to use zebra can use pig
trunk with hadoop 0.20

- milind
On 8/17/09 5:14 PM, "Yiping Han" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> +1
>
>
> On 8/18/09 7:11 AM, "Olga Natkovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>>
>>
>> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
>> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>>
>> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
>> Hadoop applications.
>>
>> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add
>>
>> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
>> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and
>>
>> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
>> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>>
>> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
>> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
>> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>>
>> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG
>>
>> team.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raghu.
>
> ----------------------
> Yiping Han
> F-3140
> (408)349-4403
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Milind Bhandarkar
Y!IM: GridSolutions
Tel: 408-349-2136
([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Over time the plan is to move Zebra to a subproject. Until this is done,
they need to have an environment where they can do their work
efficiently. I am not sure what is the concern with allowing them to
have a dev branch.

Olga

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:27 PM
To: Olga Natkovich; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Its good to know that Raghu Angadi is a PMC member and that he has
committer rights to all subprojects. That's besides the point.

The example of a branch for multi-query is not quite right. Multi-query
was part of the pig development efforts and not a contrib project.

Raghu is suggesting that he will be the first of many more committers.
If that's the case then Zebra is clearly better off being a subproject
under Hadoop. That way, Raghu need to ask for permission and the Pig
team need not deal with committers for a contrib project.

Tomorrow, there will be requests from other contrib projects for similar
reasons. I don't see this as a good enough reason to grant committer
rights to contrib projects.

Santhosh
-----Original Message-----
From: Olga Natkovich
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Santhosh Srinivasan
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Raghu is PMC member and as such already has committer rights to all
subprojects. So we are not breaking any new grounds here. The reasoning
is the same as for creating branches for Pig multiquery work that we did
in Pig.

Olga

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:39 PM
To: Santhosh Srinivasan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

My vote is -1

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:38 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add

more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and

in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG

team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

Efficiently is a subjective term. When zebra was made a contrib project,
it was very clear that they will have growing pains. If efficiency was a
top priority then zebra should have chosen the incubation route.

There will be no oversight and control into what goes into contrib. This
is a very bad precedent.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Olga Natkovich
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:37 PM
To: Santhosh Srinivasan; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Over time the plan is to move Zebra to a subproject. Until this is done,
they need to have an environment where they can do their work
efficiently. I am not sure what is the concern with allowing them to
have a dev branch.

Olga

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:27 PM
To: Olga Natkovich; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Its good to know that Raghu Angadi is a PMC member and that he has
committer rights to all subprojects. That's besides the point.

The example of a branch for multi-query is not quite right. Multi-query
was part of the pig development efforts and not a contrib project.

Raghu is suggesting that he will be the first of many more committers.
If that's the case then Zebra is clearly better off being a subproject
under Hadoop. That way, Raghu need to ask for permission and the Pig
team need not deal with committers for a contrib project.

Tomorrow, there will be requests from other contrib projects for similar
reasons. I don't see this as a good enough reason to grant committer
rights to contrib projects.

Santhosh
-----Original Message-----
From: Olga Natkovich
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Santhosh Srinivasan
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Raghu is PMC member and as such already has committer rights to all
subprojects. So we are not breaking any new grounds here. The reasoning
is the same as for creating branches for Pig multiquery work that we did
in Pig.

Olga

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:39 PM
To: Santhosh Srinivasan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

My vote is -1

-----Original Message-----
From: Santhosh Srinivasan
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:38 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
(PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.

In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
Hadoop applications.

While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add

more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and

in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.

As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.

I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG

team.

Thanks,
Raghu.

On Aug 17, 2009, at 4:38 PM, Santhosh Srinivasan wrote:

> Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
> extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that  
> Zebra
> be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.
>

There has been sufficient precedence for 'contrib committers' in  
Hadoop (e.g. Chukwa vis-a-vis the former 'Hadoop Core' sub-project)  
and is normal within the Apache world for committers with specific  
'roles' e.g specific Contrib modules, QA, Release/Build etc. (http://hadoop.apache.org/common/credits.html
  - in fact, Giridharan Kesavan is an unlisted 'release' committer for  
Apache Hadoop)

I believe it's a desired, nay stated,  goal for Zebra to graduate as a  
Hadoop sub-project eventually, based on which it was voted-in as a  
contrib module by the Apache Pig.

Given these, I don't see  any cause for concern here.

Arun

> Santhosh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>
>
> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>
> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and  
> other
> Hadoop applications.
>
> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to  
> add
>
> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk  
> and
>
> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We  
> expect
> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>
> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer  
> for
> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers,  
> there
> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>
> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from  
> PIG
>
> team.
>
> Thanks,
> Raghu.

Giridharan Kesavan's omission as a committer is an oversight on part of
the hadoop team. Ideally, he should be listed as a release engineer with
committer privileges

Secondly, QA/Release/etc are necessarily evils to ship a high quality
product while contrib projects are not.

That leaves us with contrib committers.

Can you point to earlier email threads that cover the topic of giving
committer access to contrib projects? Specifically, what does it mean to
award someone committer privileges to a contrib project, what are the
access privileges that come with such rights, what are the dos/don'ts,
etc.

Thirdly, are there instances of contrib committers creating branches?

Thanks,
Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Arun C Murthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 6:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
On Aug 17, 2009, at 4:38 PM, Santhosh Srinivasan wrote:

> Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
> extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that  
> Zebra
> be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.
>

There has been sufficient precedence for 'contrib committers' in  
Hadoop (e.g. Chukwa vis-a-vis the former 'Hadoop Core' sub-project)  
and is normal within the Apache world for committers with specific  
'roles' e.g specific Contrib modules, QA, Release/Build etc.
(http://hadoop.apache.org/common/credits.html
  - in fact, Giridharan Kesavan is an unlisted 'release' committer for  
Apache Hadoop)

I believe it's a desired, nay stated,  goal for Zebra to graduate as a  
Hadoop sub-project eventually, based on which it was voted-in as a  
contrib module by the Apache Pig.

Given these, I don't see  any cause for concern here.

Arun

> Santhosh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>
>
> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>
> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and  
> other
> Hadoop applications.
>
> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to  
> add
>
> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk  
> and
>
> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We  
> expect
> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>
> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer  
> for
> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers,  
> there
> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>
> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from  
> PIG
>
> team.
>
> Thanks,
> Raghu.

>
> That leaves us with contrib committers.
>
> Can you point to earlier email threads that cover the topic of giving
> committer access to contrib projects? Specifically, what does it  
> mean to
> award someone committer privileges to a contrib project, what are the
> access privileges that come with such rights, what are the dos/don'ts,
> etc.
>

Chukwa was a contrib module prior to it's current avatar as a full-
fledged sub-project.

It's 'contrib committers' Ari Rabkin and Eric Yang became it's first  
committers: http://markmail.org/message/75qvvcigi3qumifp

Unfortunately the email threads for voting contrib committers are  
private to the Hadoop PMC, you'll just have to take my word for it.  
*smile*
I did dig-up some other examples for you:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/lucene/java-dev/81122
http://www.nabble.com/ANNOUNCE:-Welcome--as-Contrib-Committer-td21506295.html

Contrib committers have privileges to commit only to their 'module':  
pig/trunk/contrib/zebra in this case.
> Thirdly, are there instances of contrib committers creating branches?
>

Branches are a development tool... I don't see the problem with  
creating/using them.

Arun

After a lot of back and forth and information sharing, its clear in my
mind that branches are not required for contrib projects.

My vote remains -1

Thanks,
Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Milind A Bhandarkar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

IANAC, but my (non-binding) vote is also -1. I think all the
improvements
and feature addition to zebra should be available through pig trunk. The
codebase is not big enough to justify creating a branch. If the reason
is
Pig's dependence on a checked in hadoop jar, the shims proposal by
Dmitry
should be taken up asap, so that those who want to use zebra can use pig
trunk with hadoop 0.20

- milind
On 8/17/09 5:14 PM, "Yiping Han" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> +1
>
>
> On 8/18/09 7:11 AM, "Olga Natkovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>>
>>
>> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
>> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>>
>> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and
other
>> Hadoop applications.
>>
>> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to
add
>>
>> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for
the
>> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk
and
>>
>> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We
expect
>> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>>
>> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer
for
>> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers,
there
>> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>>
>> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from
PIG
>>
>> team.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raghu.
>
> ----------------------
> Yiping Han
> F-3140
> (408)349-4403
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Milind Bhandarkar
Y!IM: GridSolutions
Tel: 408-349-2136
([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Hi Santosh,

There are two separate things :
   (a) voting a contributor as a committer
   (b) committing to a contrib project.

(b):
My experience with Hadoop is that "Contrib" by definition is very
loosely coupled with core. By convention, we as committers to core
(hdfs, mapred, etc) did not have to monitor changes to contrib as
thoroughly as we would monitor core changes. It is the responsibility of
contrib developers to make sure they are not breaking builds etc.
Contrib changes get reviewed by people interested in the project.

(a):
Voting takes place when a contributor is being blessed as a committer.
It involves some legal stuff as well. Although a committer has
permissions to commit to any part of a project, it is expected that they
don't misuse it. e.g. if I have a patch for core Map/Reduce, I would
certainly wait for a regular MR contributor to review it and possibly
commit it. It does not matter how many patches I might have contributed
to say HDFS.

Reason for (a) is simple scalability. We can not monitor everything. If
you or another PIG developer volunteers to commit zebra patches, we are
more than happy to let you do it. Please let us know. Or at any stage,
if you feel we may be violating normal conventions (like breaking builds
or committing some PIG changes).. please raise the issue. We have not
seen serious problems in this regd with any other project, I think we
should get benefit or doubt.

I have not addressed the reason for a new branch here. will pitch for it
another mail.

Raghu.

Santhosh Srinivasan wrote:
> Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
> extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
> be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.
>
> Santhosh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>
>
> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>
> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
> Hadoop applications.
>
> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add
>
> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and
>
> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>
> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>
> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG
>
> team.
>
> Thanks,
> Raghu.

The reason for a branch is purely based on fair number of improvements
we are planning for Zebra and our desire to have a stable Zebra
implementation for users to use along with PIG on Hadoop-0.20.

New features planned (jiras will be filed soon) :
    * Column security (different permissions for different columns)
    * Ability to drop columns
    * ability to address "column groups" by name
    * Support for sorted tables, map side joins,
    * ...

Many of these changes involve changes to table metadata, schema syntax,
  and on disk format of the metadata (all of these will be backward
compatible).

If Zebra was a project of its own, one would have made a 0.1.0 branch
and worked on new features in the trunk. The new proposed branch is for
achieving the same by keeping PIG and stable Zebra together. PIG branch
0.4.0 will be made when it is appropriate for PIG. Generally, a contrib
project should not influence that decision.

Is there an alternative to creating a branch? Would you prefer we commit
new features to a line that is being used by users?

Raghu.

Milind A Bhandarkar wrote:
> IANAC, but my (non-binding) vote is also -1. I think all the improvements
> and feature addition to zebra should be available through pig trunk. The
> codebase is not big enough to justify creating a branch. If the reason is
> Pig's dependence on a checked in hadoop jar, the shims proposal by Dmitry
> should be taken up asap, so that those who want to use zebra can use pig
> trunk with hadoop 0.20
>
> - milind
>
>
> On 8/17/09 5:14 PM, "Yiping Han" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> On 8/18/09 7:11 AM, "Olga Natkovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
>>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
>>> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>>>
>>> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
>>> Hadoop applications.
>>>
>>> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add
>>>
>>> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
>>> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and
>>>
>>> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
>>> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>>>
>>> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
>>> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
>>> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>>>
>>> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG
>>>
>>> team.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Raghu.
>> ----------------------
>> Yiping Han
>> F-3140
>> (408)349-4403
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
>

Raghu Angadi wrote:
> Hi Santosh,
>
> There are two separate things :
>   (a) voting a contributor as a committer
>   (b) committing to a contrib project.

[...]

> Reason for (a) is simple scalability. We can not monitor everything. If

I meant to say "Reason for (b)" (why contrib commits are treated bit
differently).

Our motivation is not to bypass any oversight.. it is just so that we
don't to burden PIG committers too much. We are happy if a PIG committer
volunteers to oversee and commit.

Raghu.

> you or another PIG developer volunteers to commit zebra patches, we are
> more than happy to let you do it. Please let us know. Or at any stage,
> if you feel we may be violating normal conventions (like breaking builds
> or committing some PIG changes).. please raise the issue. We have not
> seen serious problems in this regd with any other project, I think we
> should get benefit or doubt.
>
> I have not addressed the reason for a new branch here. will pitch for it
> another mail.
>
> Raghu.
>
> Santhosh Srinivasan wrote:
>> Is there any precedence for such proposals? I am not comfortable with
>> extending committer access to contrib teams. I would suggest that Zebra
>> be made a sub-project of Hadoop and have a life of its own.
>>
>> Santhosh
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August
>> 17, 2009 4:06 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>>
>>
>> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
>> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>>
>> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and
>> other Hadoop applications.
>>
>> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add
>>
>> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
>> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and
>>
>> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We
>> expect the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>>
>> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer
>> for Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers,
>> there might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache
>> procedure.
>>
>> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG
>>
>> team.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raghu.
>

Raghu,

Since most of the bugfixes to Pig happen in trunk, I (and several folks that
I know) tend to use pig trunk most often. It would be nice if I picked up
Zebra enhancements along the way, as well.
Since zebra.jar is not included in pig.jar (I hope not), I can still use
stable zebra jar (binary) with latest pig compiled in trunk.

Also, build failure in zebra need not impact pig release, since the other
contrib, i.e. Piggybank is also "build-optional".

I think that creating a branch results in too many changes on that branch
before a mainline merge happens. Each of the feature additions you mention
would be very highly desirable even in the absence of others.

Just my 2 non-binding cents.

- milind

On 8/17/09 10:28 PM, "Raghu Angadi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> The reason for a branch is purely based on fair number of improvements
> we are planning for Zebra and our desire to have a stable Zebra
> implementation for users to use along with PIG on Hadoop-0.20.
>
> New features planned (jiras will be filed soon) :
>     * Column security (different permissions for different columns)
>     * Ability to drop columns
>     * ability to address "column groups" by name
>     * Support for sorted tables, map side joins,
>     * ...
>
> Many of these changes involve changes to table metadata, schema syntax,
>   and on disk format of the metadata (all of these will be backward
> compatible).
>
> If Zebra was a project of its own, one would have made a 0.1.0 branch
> and worked on new features in the trunk. The new proposed branch is for
> achieving the same by keeping PIG and stable Zebra together. PIG branch
> 0.4.0 will be made when it is appropriate for PIG. Generally, a contrib
> project should not influence that decision.
>
> Is there an alternative to creating a branch? Would you prefer we commit
> new features to a line that is being used by users?
>
> Raghu.
>
> Milind A Bhandarkar wrote:
>> IANAC, but my (non-binding) vote is also -1. I think all the improvements
>> and feature addition to zebra should be available through pig trunk. The
>> codebase is not big enough to justify creating a branch. If the reason is
>> Pig's dependence on a checked in hadoop jar, the shims proposal by Dmitry
>> should be taken up asap, so that those who want to use zebra can use pig
>> trunk with hadoop 0.20
>>
>> - milind
>>
>>
>> On 8/17/09 5:14 PM, "Yiping Han" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/18/09 7:11 AM, "Olga Natkovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:06 PM
>>>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Subject: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to the PIG team, The first version of contrib project Zebra
>>>> (PIG-833) is committed to PIG trunk.
>>>>
>>>> In short, Zebra is a table storage layer built for use in PIG and other
>>>> Hadoop applications.
>>>>
>>>> While we are stabilizing current version V1 in the trunk, we plan to add
>>>>
>>>> more new features to it. We would like to create an svn branch for the
>>>> new features. We will be responsible for managing zebra in PIG trunk and
>>>>
>>>> in the new branch. We will merge the branch when it is ready. We expect
>>>> the changes to affect only 'contrib/zebra' directory.
>>>>
>>>> As a regular contributor to Hadoop, I will be the initial committer for
>>>> Zebra. As more patches are contributed by other Zebra developers, there
>>>> might be more commiters added through normal Hadoop/Apache procedure.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to create a branch called 'zebra-v2' with approval from PIG
>>>>
>>>> team.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Raghu.
>>> ----------------------
>>> Yiping Han
>>> F-3140
>>> (408)349-4403
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Milind Bhandarkar
Y!IM: GridSolutions
Tel: 408-349-2136
([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Milind A Bhandarkar wrote:
>
> Since zebra.jar is not included in pig.jar (I hope not), I can still use
> stable zebra jar (binary) with latest pig compiled in trunk.

The problem is that though the current version is "expected to be"
stable, it would still require some bug fixes. We essentially need to
maintain another branch (official or a private git) to provide version
0.1 jar with critical bug fixes.

In that sense, would it be better if we created a "zebra-v1" branch and
commit the new features to trunk? May be for regular users we can create
Pig.jar and zebra.jar from different lines.

Raghu.

> Also, build failure in zebra need not impact pig release, since the other
> contrib, i.e. Piggybank is also "build-optional".
>
> I think that creating a branch results in too many changes on that branch
> before a mainline merge happens. Each of the feature additions you mention
> would be very highly desirable even in the absence of others.
>
> Just my 2 non-binding cents.
>
> - milind
>

I would recommend that zebra wait for Pig 0.4.0 (a couple of weeks?). A
branch will be created for the 0.4.0 release and zebra will
automatically benefit.

Santhosh

-----Original Message-----
From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra

Milind A Bhandarkar wrote:
>
> Since zebra.jar is not included in pig.jar (I hope not), I can still
use
> stable zebra jar (binary) with latest pig compiled in trunk.

The problem is that though the current version is "expected to be"
stable, it would still require some bug fixes. We essentially need to
maintain another branch (official or a private git) to provide version
0.1 jar with critical bug fixes.

In that sense, would it be better if we created a "zebra-v1" branch and
commit the new features to trunk? May be for regular users we can create

Pig.jar and zebra.jar from different lines.

Raghu.

> Also, build failure in zebra need not impact pig release, since the
other
> contrib, i.e. Piggybank is also "build-optional".
>
> I think that creating a branch results in too many changes on that
branch
> before a mainline merge happens. Each of the feature additions you
mention
> would be very highly desirable even in the absence of others.
>
> Just my 2 non-binding cents.
>
> - milind
>

Right. I just noticed the mails on Pig.0.4.0. I joined pig-dev list just
yesterday. waiting for 0.4.0 might be good enough if it is just a couple
of weeks. will keep a watch on it.

I think we will wait for a few days and attach any new feature patches
to jiras. Those patches can certainly wait there. For interdependencies
of the patches, we might maintain a private git.

Raghu.

Santhosh Srinivasan wrote:
> I would recommend that zebra wait for Pig 0.4.0 (a couple of weeks?). A
> branch will be created for the 0.4.0 release and zebra will
> automatically benefit.
>
> Santhosh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raghu Angadi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:49 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Proposal to create a branch for contrib project Zebra
>
> Milind A Bhandarkar wrote:
>> Since zebra.jar is not included in pig.jar (I hope not), I can still
> use
>> stable zebra jar (binary) with latest pig compiled in trunk.
>
> The problem is that though the current version is "expected to be"
> stable, it would still require some bug fixes. We essentially need to
> maintain another branch (official or a private git) to provide version
> 0.1 jar with critical bug fixes.
>
> In that sense, would it be better if we created a "zebra-v1" branch and
> commit the new features to trunk? May be for regular users we can create
>
> Pig.jar and zebra.jar from different lines.
>
> Raghu.
>
>> Also, build failure in zebra need not impact pig release, since the
> other
>> contrib, i.e. Piggybank is also "build-optional".
>>
>> I think that creating a branch results in too many changes on that
> branch
>> before a mainline merge happens. Each of the feature additions you
> mention
>> would be very highly desirable even in the absence of others.
>>
>> Just my 2 non-binding cents.
>>
>> - milind
>>

I think we are creating unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles here by preventing
contrib project from having a branch. I don't see why zebra has to use pig
release branch, as the new pig release does not include it.

The decisions are supposed to help keeping things open, but this seems to be
forcing Raghu to keep things in private git .

-Thejas

On 8/18/09 10:56 AM, "Raghu Angadi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> Right. I just noticed the mails on Pig.0.4.0. I joined pig-dev list just
> yesterday. waiting for 0.4.0 might be good enough if it is just a couple
> of weeks. will keep a watch on it.
>
> I think we will wait for a few days and attach any new feature patches
> to jiras. Those patches can certainly wait there. For interdependencies
> of the patches, we might maintain a private git.
>
> Raghu.
>
> Santhosh Srinivasan wrote:
>> I would recommend that zebra wait for Pig 0.4.0 (a couple of weeks?). A
>> branch will be created for the 0.4.0 release and zebra will
>> automatically benefit.
>>
>> Santhosh