Hi Jagane, My response to your concerns is that I hope the PMC will have enough wisdom not to pass votes for a confusing number of releases -- if only to avoid the kind of fragmentation you point out could happen.
To date, however, this does not seem to have been a major problem in our community. Indeed, lack of regularity in release schedules is more often cited as a problem. (Which this amendment is orthogonal to, so please start a different discussion thread if anyone wants to get into that issue! :-) Thanks, --Matt On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:52 AM, Steve Loughran <ste...@hortonworks.com>wrote: > On 21 May 2013 23:47, Jagane Sundar <jag...@sundar.org> wrote: > > > I see one significant benefit to having Release Plan votes: Fewer > releases > > with more members of the community working on any given release. > > In turn, fewer Hadoop releases implies less confusion for end users > > attempting to download and use an Apache Hadoop release. > > > > If there are a dozen different releases of Apache Hadoop available for > > download at the Apache Hadoop website, end users will go to a commercial > > vendor packaged version of Hadoop. That is not good for the Apache Hadoop > > community as a whole. > > > > Jagane > > > > I agree we don't want fragmentation; you don't want to have to choose > between hadoop-2.1, hadoop-2.1.stevel-may and hadoop-2.1.stevel-june. > > With a vote on artifact releases, this can be prevented. I am free to > create my -may and -june artifacts, but the PMC -it is just the PMC right?- > get to say "no steve, you can't ship this from the apache.org" site, > though > I am free to make my own (which I have done in the past & put into my own > RPMs. No need for a vote if I do it on my own site, though I did make sure > I named the JARs and RPMs something else so that maven builds didn't get > confused. >
