You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hawq.apache.org by Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org> on 2017/02/16 01:00:19 UTC
Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Hi HAWQ dev community,
Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community have expressed
confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as compared to
Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s donation of HAWQ
codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has grown, and users of
Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help from the HAWQ
dev/user community via mailing lists.
With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing Pivotal team to
make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on Apache HAWQ
releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal, the commercial
HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ release
versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will likely result
in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus lesser user
confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache communities
like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the respective commercial
releases.
Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved by doing a
one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to 2.2.0.0 (versus
2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other end. Would
the community & the Release Manager support such a version string change to
help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ releases? I believe
such an alignment will benefit the joint user community significantly.
Regards,
Vineet
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org>.
Hey all,
Thank you so much for all the feedback and comments you provided. After
considering all the feedback and thinking through further, I wanted to
conclude on this topic. There is value in downstream alignment between HAWQ
and commercial releases that benefit the users. We all may want to consider
and discuss another avenue along the lines of alignment on software
binaries for end-users. There is more that needs to be discussed on the
initiative of producing binaries at Apache HAWQ level, but I’ll leave that
discussion for a follow-on email thread. With that in mind, I think it’s
safe to proceed with the original HAWQ release version of 2.1.0.0 for now.
I’ll start a new discussion on producing binary artifacts for HAWQ
releases, sometime soon.
Thank you everyone!
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 7:37 AM Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would strongly caution you against trying to line up Apache HAWQ and
> Pivotal release numbers. My advise comes both from my role as your Apache
> mentor and as a Hortonworker, where we have obviously had to deal with
> similar issues.
>
> As you mentioned, there is significant overlap between HDB users and the
> Apache HAWQ user community. But your proposal is making the assumption
> that this will always be so. With your Apache hats on, you have to plan
> for the possibility that it will not, and maybe even hope that it will
> not. What happens when HAWQ developers that do not work for Pivotal join
> the project and start pushing releases on a schedule that does not match
> Pivotal's delivery schedule? It would be inappropriate to prevent a
> release in Apache because Pivotal isn't ready for it. And you do want to
> force Pivotal into shipping releases on a schedule it does not control.
>
> Speaking now specifically with my Hortonworks hat on, we have found it
> easier to let the release numbers move independently. For example,
> Hortonworks' HDP 2.5 contains Apache Hadoop 2.7. It was obvious early on
> we had no choice because of the diversity of participants in the Hadoop
> project. But we have not found this confusing for our customers.
>
> Alan.
>
> > On Feb 16, 2017, at 8:39 PM, Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Let me try to clarify the request if there is any confusion. The request
> is
> > to move up the Apache HAWQ version to make room for HDB versioning to
> align
> > with it, which is why the proposal was made in this ML. Is it reasonable
> to
> > make such a request ? Well, the intention as stated earlier is purely to
> > help the user community; the overlap between HDB and HAWQ user community
> is
> > undeniable, so the request isn't meant to benefit just one side. With
> this
> > change, as Greg mentioned the benefits earlier, the Pivotal team is
> hoping
> > to leveraging Apache HAWQ releases as the basis of it's commercial
> releases
> > going forward, which would be a win-win for the end users and the Apache
> > HAWQ community.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vineet
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 7:51 PM Lei Chang <le...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Agree with Greg. Looks this is not an issue and should not be discussed
> in
> >> apache.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Lei
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm confused here. Are we voting on version numbering of a commercial
> >>> distribution of HAWQ? That would not be a concern or in the
> jurisdiction
> >> of
> >>> the Apache HAWQ community.
> >>>
> >>> Are we asking Apache HAWQ to change its version numbering to reflect
> that
> >>> of a commercial distribution? That would not be appropriate.
> >>>
> >>> Either way, this either doesn't need to be voted on in the community,
> or
> >>> shouldn't be.
> >>>
> >>> A commercial distribution is always welcome to take whatever version of
> >> the
> >>> code lines it wants from Apache HAWQ. However, there's a whole lot of
> >>> benefits for the commercial distribution if they were to take
> established
> >>> release versions from Apache HAWQ that likely have gone through IP
> checks
> >>> and hopefully a degree of quality checks.
> >>>
> >>> It also helps improve transparency of the commercial version since
> users
> >>> can look into the Jira and Github to see what new features and fixes
> are
> >>> present in the open source code.
> >>>
> >>> -Greg
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Shivram Mani <shivram.mani@gmail.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>> I don't see any negative impact in bumping up the version to 2.2. The
> >>>> positive outcome from this is that we will have more frequent apache
> >> HAWQ
> >>>> releases since majority of the committers who happen to also work on
> >> HDB
> >>>> will be focussed on apache release as the primary release channel.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Michael Pearce <
> Michael.Pearce@ig.com
> >>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> -1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and
> >>> users
> >>>>> of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal
> >>> are
> >>>>> providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a
> >> case
> >>> of
> >>>>> Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle
> >> of
> >>>>> HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change
> >>>> their
> >>>>> versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way
> >>>>> multiple companies support postgres.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>> Mike
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1 for version alignment
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>> Ruilong Huo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 for consistence
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <
> >> espino@apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing
> >>> keeping
> >>>>> track of
> >>>>>>>> versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple.
> >>> Now
> >>>>> is the
> >>>>>>> time
> >>>>>>>> to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the
> >> more
> >>>>> time
> >>>>>> passes
> >>>>>>>> on and the more the community grows.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache
> >> HAWQ
> >>>>>> incubating
> >>>>>>>> release. I will take care of that as part of the release
> >>>> process.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> -=e
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <
> >>>> vvineet@apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi HAWQ dev community,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ
> >> community
> >>>> have
> >>>>>>> expressed
> >>>>>>>>> confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions
> >> as
> >>>>> compared
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s
> >>>>> donation of
> >>>>>> HAWQ
> >>>>>>>>> codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has
> >>>> grown,
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>> users
> >>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>> Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought
> >>> help
> >>>>> from the
> >>>>>>>> HAWQ
> >>>>>>>>> dev/user community via mailing lists.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m
> >> proposing
> >>>>> Pivotal
> >>>>>>> team
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based
> >> on
> >>>>> Apache
> >>>>>> HAWQ
> >>>>>>>>> releases as much as possible. And, as part of the
> >> proposal,
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>> commercial
> >>>>>>>>> HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ
> >>>>> release
> >>>>>>>>> versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal
> >>> will
> >>>>> likely
> >>>>>>>> result
> >>>>>>>>> in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration,
> >>> plus
> >>>>> lesser
> >>>>>>> user
> >>>>>>>>> confusion. I have seen this model work well in other
> >> Apache
> >>>>>> communities
> >>>>>>>>> like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the
> >>>> respective
> >>>>>>>> commercial
> >>>>>>>>> releases.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be
> >>> achieved
> >>>>> by
> >>>>>> doing
> >>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>> one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to
> >>>>> 2.2.0.0
> >>>>>>> (versus
> >>>>>>>>> 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the
> >>> other
> >>>>> end.
> >>>>>>> Would
> >>>>>>>>> the community & the Release Manager support such a
> >> version
> >>>>> string
> >>>>>>> change
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ
> >>>> releases?
> >>>>> I
> >>>>>>> believe
> >>>>>>>>> such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> >>>>>> significantly.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Vineet
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> *Ed Espino*
> >>>>>>>> *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>> Yandong
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and
> >>> for
> >>>>> the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are
> >>> not
> >>>>> the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to
> >>>> others
> >>>>> this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by
> >>> replying
> >>>>> to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the
> >>>> email
> >>>>> and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate
> >> to
> >>>> the
> >>>>> official business of this company shall be understood as neither
> >> given
> >>>> nor
> >>>>> endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
> >>>>> registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG
> >> Index
> >>>>> Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
> >>>>> 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate
> >> Hill,
> >>>>> London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and
> >>> IG
> >>>>> Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated
> >> by
> >>>> the
> >>>>> Financial Conduct Authority.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> shivram mani
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Alan Gates <al...@gmail.com>.
I would strongly caution you against trying to line up Apache HAWQ and Pivotal release numbers. My advise comes both from my role as your Apache mentor and as a Hortonworker, where we have obviously had to deal with similar issues.
As you mentioned, there is significant overlap between HDB users and the Apache HAWQ user community. But your proposal is making the assumption that this will always be so. With your Apache hats on, you have to plan for the possibility that it will not, and maybe even hope that it will not. What happens when HAWQ developers that do not work for Pivotal join the project and start pushing releases on a schedule that does not match Pivotal's delivery schedule? It would be inappropriate to prevent a release in Apache because Pivotal isn't ready for it. And you do want to force Pivotal into shipping releases on a schedule it does not control.
Speaking now specifically with my Hortonworks hat on, we have found it easier to let the release numbers move independently. For example, Hortonworks' HDP 2.5 contains Apache Hadoop 2.7. It was obvious early on we had no choice because of the diversity of participants in the Hadoop project. But we have not found this confusing for our customers.
Alan.
> On Feb 16, 2017, at 8:39 PM, Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Let me try to clarify the request if there is any confusion. The request is
> to move up the Apache HAWQ version to make room for HDB versioning to align
> with it, which is why the proposal was made in this ML. Is it reasonable to
> make such a request ? Well, the intention as stated earlier is purely to
> help the user community; the overlap between HDB and HAWQ user community is
> undeniable, so the request isn't meant to benefit just one side. With this
> change, as Greg mentioned the benefits earlier, the Pivotal team is hoping
> to leveraging Apache HAWQ releases as the basis of it's commercial releases
> going forward, which would be a win-win for the end users and the Apache
> HAWQ community.
>
> Regards,
> Vineet
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 7:51 PM Lei Chang <le...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Agree with Greg. Looks this is not an issue and should not be discussed in
>> apache.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Lei
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm confused here. Are we voting on version numbering of a commercial
>>> distribution of HAWQ? That would not be a concern or in the jurisdiction
>> of
>>> the Apache HAWQ community.
>>>
>>> Are we asking Apache HAWQ to change its version numbering to reflect that
>>> of a commercial distribution? That would not be appropriate.
>>>
>>> Either way, this either doesn't need to be voted on in the community, or
>>> shouldn't be.
>>>
>>> A commercial distribution is always welcome to take whatever version of
>> the
>>> code lines it wants from Apache HAWQ. However, there's a whole lot of
>>> benefits for the commercial distribution if they were to take established
>>> release versions from Apache HAWQ that likely have gone through IP checks
>>> and hopefully a degree of quality checks.
>>>
>>> It also helps improve transparency of the commercial version since users
>>> can look into the Jira and Github to see what new features and fixes are
>>> present in the open source code.
>>>
>>> -Greg
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Shivram Mani <sh...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>> I don't see any negative impact in bumping up the version to 2.2. The
>>>> positive outcome from this is that we will have more frequent apache
>> HAWQ
>>>> releases since majority of the committers who happen to also work on
>> HDB
>>>> will be focussed on apache release as the primary release channel.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Michael Pearce <Michael.Pearce@ig.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -1
>>>>>
>>>>> Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and
>>> users
>>>>> of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
>>>>>
>>>>> We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal
>>> are
>>>>> providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a
>> case
>>> of
>>>>> Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
>>>>>
>>>>> Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle
>> of
>>>>> HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change
>>>> their
>>>>> versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way
>>>>> multiple companies support postgres.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 for version alignment
>>>>>
>>>>> 2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Ruilong Huo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 for consistence
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <
>> espino@apache.org
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing
>>> keeping
>>>>> track of
>>>>>>>> versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple.
>>> Now
>>>>> is the
>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>> to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the
>> more
>>>>> time
>>>>>> passes
>>>>>>>> on and the more the community grows.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache
>> HAWQ
>>>>>> incubating
>>>>>>>> release. I will take care of that as part of the release
>>>> process.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> -=e
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <
>>>> vvineet@apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi HAWQ dev community,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ
>> community
>>>> have
>>>>>>> expressed
>>>>>>>>> confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions
>> as
>>>>> compared
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s
>>>>> donation of
>>>>>> HAWQ
>>>>>>>>> codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has
>>>> grown,
>>>>> and
>>>>>>> users
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought
>>> help
>>>>> from the
>>>>>>>> HAWQ
>>>>>>>>> dev/user community via mailing lists.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m
>> proposing
>>>>> Pivotal
>>>>>>> team
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based
>> on
>>>>> Apache
>>>>>> HAWQ
>>>>>>>>> releases as much as possible. And, as part of the
>> proposal,
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> commercial
>>>>>>>>> HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ
>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>> versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal
>>> will
>>>>> likely
>>>>>>>> result
>>>>>>>>> in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration,
>>> plus
>>>>> lesser
>>>>>>> user
>>>>>>>>> confusion. I have seen this model work well in other
>> Apache
>>>>>> communities
>>>>>>>>> like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the
>>>> respective
>>>>>>>> commercial
>>>>>>>>> releases.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be
>>> achieved
>>>>> by
>>>>>> doing
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to
>>>>> 2.2.0.0
>>>>>>> (versus
>>>>>>>>> 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the
>>> other
>>>>> end.
>>>>>>> Would
>>>>>>>>> the community & the Release Manager support such a
>> version
>>>>> string
>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ
>>>> releases?
>>>>> I
>>>>>>> believe
>>>>>>>>> such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
>>>>>> significantly.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Vineet
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> *Ed Espino*
>>>>>>>> *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Yandong
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and
>>> for
>>>>> the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are
>>> not
>>>>> the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to
>>>> others
>>>>> this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by
>>> replying
>>>>> to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the
>>>> email
>>>>> and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate
>> to
>>>> the
>>>>> official business of this company shall be understood as neither
>> given
>>>> nor
>>>>> endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
>>>>> registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG
>> Index
>>>>> Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
>>>>> 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate
>> Hill,
>>>>> London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and
>>> IG
>>>>> Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated
>> by
>>>> the
>>>>> Financial Conduct Authority.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> shivram mani
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org>.
Hi everyone,
Let me try to clarify the request if there is any confusion. The request is
to move up the Apache HAWQ version to make room for HDB versioning to align
with it, which is why the proposal was made in this ML. Is it reasonable to
make such a request ? Well, the intention as stated earlier is purely to
help the user community; the overlap between HDB and HAWQ user community is
undeniable, so the request isn't meant to benefit just one side. With this
change, as Greg mentioned the benefits earlier, the Pivotal team is hoping
to leveraging Apache HAWQ releases as the basis of it's commercial releases
going forward, which would be a win-win for the end users and the Apache
HAWQ community.
Regards,
Vineet
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 7:51 PM Lei Chang <le...@apache.org> wrote:
> Agree with Greg. Looks this is not an issue and should not be discussed in
> apache.
>
> Thanks
> Lei
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm confused here. Are we voting on version numbering of a commercial
> > distribution of HAWQ? That would not be a concern or in the jurisdiction
> of
> > the Apache HAWQ community.
> >
> > Are we asking Apache HAWQ to change its version numbering to reflect that
> > of a commercial distribution? That would not be appropriate.
> >
> > Either way, this either doesn't need to be voted on in the community, or
> > shouldn't be.
> >
> > A commercial distribution is always welcome to take whatever version of
> the
> > code lines it wants from Apache HAWQ. However, there's a whole lot of
> > benefits for the commercial distribution if they were to take established
> > release versions from Apache HAWQ that likely have gone through IP checks
> > and hopefully a degree of quality checks.
> >
> > It also helps improve transparency of the commercial version since users
> > can look into the Jira and Github to see what new features and fixes are
> > present in the open source code.
> >
> > -Greg
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Shivram Mani <sh...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > > I don't see any negative impact in bumping up the version to 2.2. The
> > > positive outcome from this is that we will have more frequent apache
> HAWQ
> > > releases since majority of the committers who happen to also work on
> HDB
> > > will be focussed on apache release as the primary release channel.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Michael Pearce <Michael.Pearce@ig.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > -1
> > > >
> > > > Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and
> > users
> > > > of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
> > > >
> > > > We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal
> > are
> > > > providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a
> case
> > of
> > > > Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
> > > >
> > > > Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle
> of
> > > > HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change
> > > their
> > > > versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way
> > > > multiple companies support postgres.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1 for version alignment
> > > >
> > > > 2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
> > > >
> > > > > Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Ruilong Huo
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 for consistence
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <
> espino@apache.org
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing
> > keeping
> > > > track of
> > > > > > > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple.
> > Now
> > > > is the
> > > > > > time
> > > > > > > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the
> more
> > > > time
> > > > > passes
> > > > > > > on and the more the community grows.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache
> HAWQ
> > > > > incubating
> > > > > > > release. I will take care of that as part of the release
> > > process.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > -=e
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <
> > > vvineet@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ
> community
> > > have
> > > > > > expressed
> > > > > > > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions
> as
> > > > compared
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s
> > > > donation of
> > > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has
> > > grown,
> > > > and
> > > > > > users
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought
> > help
> > > > from the
> > > > > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m
> proposing
> > > > Pivotal
> > > > > > team
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based
> on
> > > > Apache
> > > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the
> proposal,
> > > the
> > > > > > > commercial
> > > > > > > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ
> > > > release
> > > > > > > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal
> > will
> > > > likely
> > > > > > > result
> > > > > > > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration,
> > plus
> > > > lesser
> > > > > > user
> > > > > > > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other
> Apache
> > > > > communities
> > > > > > > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the
> > > respective
> > > > > > > commercial
> > > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be
> > achieved
> > > > by
> > > > > doing
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to
> > > > 2.2.0.0
> > > > > > (versus
> > > > > > > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the
> > other
> > > > end.
> > > > > > Would
> > > > > > > > the community & the Release Manager support such a
> version
> > > > string
> > > > > > change
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ
> > > releases?
> > > > I
> > > > > > believe
> > > > > > > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> > > > > significantly.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Vineet
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > *Ed Espino*
> > > > > > > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > Yandong
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and
> > for
> > > > the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are
> > not
> > > > the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to
> > > others
> > > > this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by
> > replying
> > > > to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the
> > > email
> > > > and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate
> to
> > > the
> > > > official business of this company shall be understood as neither
> given
> > > nor
> > > > endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
> > > > registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG
> Index
> > > > Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
> > > > 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate
> Hill,
> > > > London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and
> > IG
> > > > Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated
> by
> > > the
> > > > Financial Conduct Authority.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > shivram mani
> > >
> >
>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Lei Chang <le...@apache.org>.
Agree with Greg. Looks this is not an issue and should not be discussed in
apache.
Thanks
Lei
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
> I'm confused here. Are we voting on version numbering of a commercial
> distribution of HAWQ? That would not be a concern or in the jurisdiction of
> the Apache HAWQ community.
>
> Are we asking Apache HAWQ to change its version numbering to reflect that
> of a commercial distribution? That would not be appropriate.
>
> Either way, this either doesn't need to be voted on in the community, or
> shouldn't be.
>
> A commercial distribution is always welcome to take whatever version of the
> code lines it wants from Apache HAWQ. However, there's a whole lot of
> benefits for the commercial distribution if they were to take established
> release versions from Apache HAWQ that likely have gone through IP checks
> and hopefully a degree of quality checks.
>
> It also helps improve transparency of the commercial version since users
> can look into the Jira and Github to see what new features and fixes are
> present in the open source code.
>
> -Greg
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Shivram Mani <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > I don't see any negative impact in bumping up the version to 2.2. The
> > positive outcome from this is that we will have more frequent apache HAWQ
> > releases since majority of the committers who happen to also work on HDB
> > will be focussed on apache release as the primary release channel.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Michael Pearce <Mi...@ig.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > -1
> > >
> > > Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and
> users
> > > of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
> > >
> > > We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal
> are
> > > providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a case
> of
> > > Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
> > >
> > > Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle of
> > > HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change
> > their
> > > versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way
> > > multiple companies support postgres.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 for version alignment
> > >
> > > 2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
> > >
> > > > Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Ruilong Huo
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 for consistence
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <espino@apache.org
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing
> keeping
> > > track of
> > > > > > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple.
> Now
> > > is the
> > > > > time
> > > > > > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more
> > > time
> > > > passes
> > > > > > on and the more the community grows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ
> > > > incubating
> > > > > > release. I will take care of that as part of the release
> > process.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > -=e
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <
> > vvineet@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community
> > have
> > > > > expressed
> > > > > > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as
> > > compared
> > > > to
> > > > > > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s
> > > donation of
> > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has
> > grown,
> > > and
> > > > > users
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought
> help
> > > from the
> > > > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing
> > > Pivotal
> > > > > team
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on
> > > Apache
> > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal,
> > the
> > > > > > commercial
> > > > > > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ
> > > release
> > > > > > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal
> will
> > > likely
> > > > > > result
> > > > > > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration,
> plus
> > > lesser
> > > > > user
> > > > > > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache
> > > > communities
> > > > > > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the
> > respective
> > > > > > commercial
> > > > > > > releases.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be
> achieved
> > > by
> > > > doing
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to
> > > 2.2.0.0
> > > > > (versus
> > > > > > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the
> other
> > > end.
> > > > > Would
> > > > > > > the community & the Release Manager support such a version
> > > string
> > > > > change
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ
> > releases?
> > > I
> > > > > believe
> > > > > > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> > > > significantly.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vineet
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > *Ed Espino*
> > > > > > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Yandong
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and
> for
> > > the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are
> not
> > > the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to
> > others
> > > this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by
> replying
> > > to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the
> > email
> > > and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate to
> > the
> > > official business of this company shall be understood as neither given
> > nor
> > > endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
> > > registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG Index
> > > Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
> > > 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate Hill,
> > > London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and
> IG
> > > Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated by
> > the
> > > Financial Conduct Authority.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > shivram mani
> >
>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com>.
I'm confused here. Are we voting on version numbering of a commercial
distribution of HAWQ? That would not be a concern or in the jurisdiction of
the Apache HAWQ community.
Are we asking Apache HAWQ to change its version numbering to reflect that
of a commercial distribution? That would not be appropriate.
Either way, this either doesn't need to be voted on in the community, or
shouldn't be.
A commercial distribution is always welcome to take whatever version of the
code lines it wants from Apache HAWQ. However, there's a whole lot of
benefits for the commercial distribution if they were to take established
release versions from Apache HAWQ that likely have gone through IP checks
and hopefully a degree of quality checks.
It also helps improve transparency of the commercial version since users
can look into the Jira and Github to see what new features and fixes are
present in the open source code.
-Greg
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Shivram Mani <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1
> I don't see any negative impact in bumping up the version to 2.2. The
> positive outcome from this is that we will have more frequent apache HAWQ
> releases since majority of the committers who happen to also work on HDB
> will be focussed on apache release as the primary release channel.
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Michael Pearce <Mi...@ig.com>
> wrote:
>
> > -1
> >
> > Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and users
> > of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
> >
> > We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal are
> > providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a case of
> > Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
> >
> > Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle of
> > HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change
> their
> > versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way
> > multiple companies support postgres.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Mike
> >
> > On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for version alignment
> >
> > 2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
> >
> > > Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Ruilong Huo
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 for consistence
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <es...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping
> > track of
> > > > > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now
> > is the
> > > > time
> > > > > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more
> > time
> > > passes
> > > > > on and the more the community grows.
> > > > >
> > > > > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ
> > > incubating
> > > > > release. I will take care of that as part of the release
> process.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > -=e
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <
> vvineet@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community
> have
> > > > expressed
> > > > > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as
> > compared
> > > to
> > > > > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s
> > donation of
> > > HAWQ
> > > > > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has
> grown,
> > and
> > > > users
> > > > > of
> > > > > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help
> > from the
> > > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing
> > Pivotal
> > > > team
> > > > > to
> > > > > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on
> > Apache
> > > HAWQ
> > > > > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal,
> the
> > > > > commercial
> > > > > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ
> > release
> > > > > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will
> > likely
> > > > > result
> > > > > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus
> > lesser
> > > > user
> > > > > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache
> > > communities
> > > > > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the
> respective
> > > > > commercial
> > > > > > releases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved
> > by
> > > doing
> > > > a
> > > > > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to
> > 2.2.0.0
> > > > (versus
> > > > > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other
> > end.
> > > > Would
> > > > > > the community & the Release Manager support such a version
> > string
> > > > change
> > > > > to
> > > > > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ
> releases?
> > I
> > > > believe
> > > > > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> > > significantly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vineet
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Ed Espino*
> > > > > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Yandong
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and for
> > the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are not
> > the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to
> others
> > this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by replying
> > to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the
> email
> > and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate to
> the
> > official business of this company shall be understood as neither given
> nor
> > endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
> > registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG Index
> > Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
> > 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate Hill,
> > London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and IG
> > Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated by
> the
> > Financial Conduct Authority.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> shivram mani
>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Lav Jain <la...@gmail.com>.
+1
Misaligned versions are always a source of major confusion.
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Shivram Mani <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1
> I don't see any negative impact in bumping up the version to 2.2. The
> positive outcome from this is that we will have more frequent apache HAWQ
> releases since majority of the committers who happen to also work on HDB
> will be focussed on apache release as the primary release channel.
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Michael Pearce <Mi...@ig.com>
> wrote:
>
> > -1
> >
> > Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and users
> > of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
> >
> > We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal are
> > providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a case of
> > Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
> >
> > Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle of
> > HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change
> their
> > versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way
> > multiple companies support postgres.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Mike
> >
> > On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for version alignment
> >
> > 2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
> >
> > > Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Ruilong Huo
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 for consistence
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <es...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping
> > track of
> > > > > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now
> > is the
> > > > time
> > > > > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more
> > time
> > > passes
> > > > > on and the more the community grows.
> > > > >
> > > > > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ
> > > incubating
> > > > > release. I will take care of that as part of the release
> process.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > -=e
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <
> vvineet@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community
> have
> > > > expressed
> > > > > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as
> > compared
> > > to
> > > > > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s
> > donation of
> > > HAWQ
> > > > > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has
> grown,
> > and
> > > > users
> > > > > of
> > > > > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help
> > from the
> > > > > HAWQ
> > > > > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing
> > Pivotal
> > > > team
> > > > > to
> > > > > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on
> > Apache
> > > HAWQ
> > > > > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal,
> the
> > > > > commercial
> > > > > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ
> > release
> > > > > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will
> > likely
> > > > > result
> > > > > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus
> > lesser
> > > > user
> > > > > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache
> > > communities
> > > > > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the
> respective
> > > > > commercial
> > > > > > releases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved
> > by
> > > doing
> > > > a
> > > > > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to
> > 2.2.0.0
> > > > (versus
> > > > > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other
> > end.
> > > > Would
> > > > > > the community & the Release Manager support such a version
> > string
> > > > change
> > > > > to
> > > > > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ
> releases?
> > I
> > > > believe
> > > > > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> > > significantly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vineet
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Ed Espino*
> > > > > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Yandong
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and for
> > the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are not
> > the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to
> others
> > this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by replying
> > to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the
> email
> > and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate to
> the
> > official business of this company shall be understood as neither given
> nor
> > endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
> > registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG Index
> > Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
> > 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate Hill,
> > London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and IG
> > Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated by
> the
> > Financial Conduct Authority.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> shivram mani
>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Shivram Mani <sh...@gmail.com>.
+1
I don't see any negative impact in bumping up the version to 2.2. The
positive outcome from this is that we will have more frequent apache HAWQ
releases since majority of the committers who happen to also work on HDB
will be focussed on apache release as the primary release channel.
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Michael Pearce <Mi...@ig.com>
wrote:
> -1
>
> Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and users
> of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
>
> We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal are
> providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a case of
> Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
>
> Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle of
> HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change their
> versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way
> multiple companies support postgres.
>
> Cheers
> Mike
>
> On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> +1 for version alignment
>
> 2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
>
> > Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Ruilong Huo
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for consistence
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <es...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping
> track of
> > > > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now
> is the
> > > time
> > > > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more
> time
> > passes
> > > > on and the more the community grows.
> > > >
> > > > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ
> > incubating
> > > > release. I will take care of that as part of the release process.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > -=e
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <vvineet@apache.org
> >
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community have
> > > expressed
> > > > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as
> compared
> > to
> > > > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s
> donation of
> > HAWQ
> > > > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has grown,
> and
> > > users
> > > > of
> > > > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help
> from the
> > > > HAWQ
> > > > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing
> Pivotal
> > > team
> > > > to
> > > > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on
> Apache
> > HAWQ
> > > > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal, the
> > > > commercial
> > > > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ
> release
> > > > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will
> likely
> > > > result
> > > > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus
> lesser
> > > user
> > > > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache
> > communities
> > > > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the respective
> > > > commercial
> > > > > releases.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved
> by
> > doing
> > > a
> > > > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to
> 2.2.0.0
> > > (versus
> > > > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other
> end.
> > > Would
> > > > > the community & the Release Manager support such a version
> string
> > > change
> > > > to
> > > > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ releases?
> I
> > > believe
> > > > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> > significantly.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Vineet
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Ed Espino*
> > > > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Yandong
> > >
> >
>
>
> The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and for
> the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to others
> this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by replying
> to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the email
> and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate to the
> official business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor
> endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
> registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG Index
> Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
> 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate Hill,
> London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and IG
> Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated by the
> Financial Conduct Authority.
>
--
shivram mani
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Michael Pearce <Mi...@ig.com>.
-1
Whilst I agree that version alignment is important for Pivotal and users of HDB (my own self being a HDP client).
We have to remember this is an open source Apache project and Pivotal are providing a downstream supported version, surely this should be a case of Pivotal aligning to the Apache Version, not the other-way around.
Likewise, if any other company wished to provide a supported bundle of HAWQ, then I wouldn’t expect the open source Apache project to change their versioning for a commercial enterprise. I see this much the same way multiple companies support postgres.
Cheers
Mike
On 16/02/2017, 06:06, "Lili Ma" <li...@apache.org> wrote:
+1 for version alignment
2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
> Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
>
> Best regards,
> Ruilong Huo
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > +1 for consistence
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <es...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping track of
> > > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now is the
> > time
> > > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more time
> passes
> > > on and the more the community grows.
> > >
> > > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ
> incubating
> > > release. I will take care of that as part of the release process.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -=e
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community have
> > expressed
> > > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as compared
> to
> > > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s donation of
> HAWQ
> > > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has grown, and
> > users
> > > of
> > > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help from the
> > > HAWQ
> > > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing Pivotal
> > team
> > > to
> > > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on Apache
> HAWQ
> > > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal, the
> > > commercial
> > > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ release
> > > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will likely
> > > result
> > > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus lesser
> > user
> > > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache
> communities
> > > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the respective
> > > commercial
> > > > releases.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved by
> doing
> > a
> > > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to 2.2.0.0
> > (versus
> > > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other end.
> > Would
> > > > the community & the Release Manager support such a version string
> > change
> > > to
> > > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ releases? I
> > believe
> > > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> significantly.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Vineet
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Ed Espino*
> > > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Yandong
> >
>
The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and for the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to others this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by replying to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the email and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate to the official business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG Index Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate Hill, London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and IG Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Lili Ma <li...@apache.org>.
+1 for version alignment
2017-02-16 13:43 GMT+08:00 Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>:
> Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
>
> Best regards,
> Ruilong Huo
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > +1 for consistence
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <es...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping track of
> > > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now is the
> > time
> > > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more time
> passes
> > > on and the more the community grows.
> > >
> > > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ
> incubating
> > > release. I will take care of that as part of the release process.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -=e
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community have
> > expressed
> > > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as compared
> to
> > > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s donation of
> HAWQ
> > > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has grown, and
> > users
> > > of
> > > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help from the
> > > HAWQ
> > > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing Pivotal
> > team
> > > to
> > > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on Apache
> HAWQ
> > > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal, the
> > > commercial
> > > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ release
> > > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will likely
> > > result
> > > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus lesser
> > user
> > > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache
> communities
> > > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the respective
> > > commercial
> > > > releases.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved by
> doing
> > a
> > > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to 2.2.0.0
> > (versus
> > > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other end.
> > Would
> > > > the community & the Release Manager support such a version string
> > change
> > > to
> > > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ releases? I
> > believe
> > > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community
> significantly.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Vineet
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Ed Espino*
> > > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Yandong
> >
>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Ruilong Huo <rh...@pivotal.io>.
Looks a good plan for the version alignment. +1
Best regards,
Ruilong Huo
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> +1 for consistence
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <es...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping track of
> > versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now is the
> time
> > to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more time passes
> > on and the more the community grows.
> >
> > This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ incubating
> > release. I will take care of that as part of the release process.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -=e
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> > >
> > >
> > > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community have
> expressed
> > > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as compared to
> > > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s donation of HAWQ
> > > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has grown, and
> users
> > of
> > > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help from the
> > HAWQ
> > > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> > >
> > >
> > > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing Pivotal
> team
> > to
> > > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on Apache HAWQ
> > > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal, the
> > commercial
> > > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ release
> > > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will likely
> > result
> > > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus lesser
> user
> > > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache communities
> > > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the respective
> > commercial
> > > releases.
> > >
> > >
> > > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved by doing
> a
> > > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to 2.2.0.0
> (versus
> > > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other end.
> Would
> > > the community & the Release Manager support such a version string
> change
> > to
> > > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ releases? I
> believe
> > > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community significantly.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Vineet
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Ed Espino*
> > *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Yandong
>
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Yandong Yao <yy...@pivotal.io>.
+1 for consistence
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ed Espino <es...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping track of
> versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now is the time
> to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more time passes
> on and the more the community grows.
>
> This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ incubating
> release. I will take care of that as part of the release process.
>
> Thanks,
> -=e
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi HAWQ dev community,
> >
> >
> > Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community have expressed
> > confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as compared to
> > Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s donation of HAWQ
> > codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has grown, and users
> of
> > Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help from the
> HAWQ
> > dev/user community via mailing lists.
> >
> >
> > With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing Pivotal team
> to
> > make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on Apache HAWQ
> > releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal, the
> commercial
> > HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ release
> > versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will likely
> result
> > in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus lesser user
> > confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache communities
> > like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the respective
> commercial
> > releases.
> >
> >
> > Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved by doing a
> > one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to 2.2.0.0 (versus
> > 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other end. Would
> > the community & the Release Manager support such a version string change
> to
> > help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ releases? I believe
> > such an alignment will benefit the joint user community significantly.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Vineet
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Ed Espino*
> *espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*
>
--
Best Regards,
Yandong
Re: Apache HAWQ & Pivotal HDB release alignment
Posted by Ed Espino <es...@apache.org>.
+1 to this recommendation. It has been a bit confusing keeping track of
versions. The Apache HAWQ version update is fairly simple. Now is the time
to make such an update. I imagine it will get harder the more time passes
on and the more the community grows.
This will impact Jira versioning for our upcoming Apache HAWQ incubating
release. I will take care of that as part of the release process.
Thanks,
-=e
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Vineet Goel <vv...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi HAWQ dev community,
>
>
> Over the last few months, many users in the HAWQ community have expressed
> confusion about Apache HAWQ incubating release versions as compared to
> Pivotal HDB release version numbering. Since Pivotal’s donation of HAWQ
> codebase to Apache in September 2015, the community has grown, and users of
> Apache HAWQ as well as HDB have participated and sought help from the HAWQ
> dev/user community via mailing lists.
>
>
> With my Pivotal representation on this topic, I’m proposing Pivotal team to
> make an effort to align commercial releases of HDB based on Apache HAWQ
> releases as much as possible. And, as part of the proposal, the commercial
> HDB versions should also be aligned with the Apache HAWQ release
> versioning. The net result of this alignment at Pivotal will likely result
> in higher Apache HAWQ release cadence and collaboration, plus lesser user
> confusion. I have seen this model work well in other Apache communities
> like Apache Ambari and more, in conjunction with the respective commercial
> releases.
>
>
> Such an alignment on the versioning could quickly be achieved by doing a
> one-time version bump of upcoming Apache HAWQ release to 2.2.0.0 (versus
> 2.1.0.0) as there is no way to lower the version on the other end. Would
> the community & the Release Manager support such a version string change to
> help Pivotal align their HDB releases to Apache HAWQ releases? I believe
> such an alignment will benefit the joint user community significantly.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Vineet
>
--
*Ed Espino*
*espino@apache.org <es...@apache.org>*