Hi Gwen, Other than the recent thread [1] on our user list, is there any other precedent regarding the confusion this issue has caused? If so, I would appreciate if you could point it out.
Personally, I do agree that we ought to have a better mechanism to communicate the completeness (or incompleteness) of a release in order to ensure the users understand what benefits or drawbacks they may get. Incidentally, this was the primary reason for numbering the Sqoop2 release as 1.99.x, thereby indicating that the release is not quite 2.0 yet, which seems to be not working as well as expected. One traditional way to alleviate this issue would be to label the release alpha/beta etc. I prefer doing that instead of putting a code name for the release for a couple of reasons - a) we have already made releases of Sqoop2 with the previous versioning scheme and hence changing the name could cause more confusion; and b) renaming the branches to the new name could impact the reproducibility of previous release builds which is not very good for the project. Another alternative to consider would be to have very clear messaging in the user-interface of Sqoop2 that it is still work in progress and not considered at par with Sqoop1. [1] http://s.apache.org/TvD Regards, Arvind Prabhakar On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Venkat Ranganathan < vranganat...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > +1 for Pelican. But documentation should not be called The Pelican Brief > :) > > Venkat > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Abraham Elmahrek <a...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > There's something about schlep (or schlepper) that I'm having trouble > > resisting... but... +1 to Pelican. > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <jar...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> I’m obviously biased, but +1 to Pelican. > >> > >> Jarcec > >> > >> On Jul 24, 2014, at 7:06 PM, Martin, Nick <nimar...@pssd.com> wrote: > >> > >> > +1 Pelican > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Gwen Shapira [mailto:gshap...@cloudera.com] > >> > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:51 PM > >> > To: dev@sqoop.apache.org > >> > Subject: Code name for Sqoop 2 (please vote!) > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > As you may have noticed on the user list, Sqoop2 confuses the hell out > >> of everyone. > >> > > >> > Part of the problem is the name - Sqoop2 sounds newer and therefore > >> better. People expect better quality and more features - which we don't > >> deliver :( > >> > > >> > Therefore, I propose finding Sqoop2 a project code name. This way it > >> will sound experimental and will not have the number "2" next to it. > >> > We can use the code name to mark the branches in the repo, the > >> documentation, the Hue frontend, etc. This will prevent confusion as the > >> name Sqoop will go back to refer to just one project, and one that > actually > >> works. > >> > > >> > Suggested names: > >> > Project Pelican (Based on the animal on O'Reilly's Sqoop book) Project > >> Schlep (Yiddish for "moving heavy package") > >> > > >> > Friends, contributors, committers and PMC members - please respond > with > >> either: > >> > * Vote (+1) on one of the names above > >> > * Your own suggestion > >> > > >> > We'll be looking to close the vote by August 1st (Next week). > >> > > >> > Gwen > >> > >> > > -- > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately > and delete it from your system. Thank You. >
