+1 to drop vendor related docs. Links to vendors’ webpages should be enough
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 08:15 Seth Wiesman <sjwies...@gmail.com> wrote: > @uce Agreed. The discussion here seems to have died down. Since I assume > most people following this thread have gone home for the day, I'll leave > this for one more day and then remove the pages tomorrow. > > Seth > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 9:38 AM Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Answers inline... > > > > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 6:28 PM Seth Wiesman <sjwies...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > One option would be to do exactly that, but then I feel like we are > > > committing to tracking changes on those systems and I just don't know > how > > > feasible that is. > > > > > > > I don't think that's feasible. It's bound to get out of sync. > > > > > > > I am personally still in favor of the removal of all three but as a > > > compromise, we could replace these pages with a "Vendor" page that just > > > links to the appropriate docs for these services. It could also include > > the > > > most basic Filesystem information that @ufuk mentioned. That still > leaves > > > an open question of who we allow. Just the cloud providers or also > others > > > like Cloudera and Ververica? For AWS only EMR or also Kinesis Data > > > Analytics, etc. > > > > > > > Judging from Robert's numbers, I'm happy to drop these pages as well now. > > > > Since there is no objection to remove those pages (and we wouldn't > recycle > > any content anyways for anything going forward), I suggest to continue > with > > the removal and keep the discussion of a new vendor page separate. > > > > – Ufuk > > >
