Hi Daniel... On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> > We had a very similar discussion about the back word compatibility > classes/package names when Subversion graduated and we deemed it OK for > them. > In fact, I believe they still of org.tigris packages in their codebase long > after graduation. See: > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/subversion/bindings/javahl/src/org/ > > > I don't see why we would or should hold Sqoop to a different or higher > standard at this point. I agree with Jukka that if we, as a foundation, > would like to re-address this, fine, take it to trademarks@ and start a > discussion. However, from an INCUBATOR standpoint, the precedent and > expectations have been set. > > That's my $0.02 cents worth. > Thanks a lot for this, but would you elaborate more on why this has been accepted ? My believe is that there is some clarification that should be added to documentation so it is more clear for all people in the future, your input on this example would help indeed. > Dan > > > > On Tuesday, February 28, 2012 10:25:41 PM Jukka Zitting wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <a...@toolazydogs.com > > > wrote: > > >> Opps, I didn't see that Arvind concluded the vote. I still stand by > my > > >> opinion that there are some things that are not solely up to the > people > > >> that are doing the work. Complete migration to the the org.apache.* > > >> package space is one of them. > > > > > > No worries. I respect your opinion and if Apache feels that this is > > > important enough to make explicit then certainly Sqoop should make the > > > changes. Short of that I don't see why we should hold Sqoop to a > > > higher standard than is expected of other Apache projects. (that's > > > _my_ opinion ;-) ) > > > > Right. > > > > Basically the graduation vote by the IPMC is about determining whether > > the PPMC is capable of conducting itself according to the Apache Way > > and Apache policies on it's own. I didn't have time to look deeper > > into Sqoop yet, but all the +1s in this vote suggest that the Sqoop > > PPMC is ready to take on that responsibility. Along with that > > responsibility comes the right to make value judgements on topics like > > this where existing policies aren't clearly spelled out. > > > > Personally I think we should let the vote result stand with guidance > > to the new Sqoop PMC to discuss the matter with the branding team at > > trademarks@ to seek Apache-wide consensus. I encourage anyone who > > feels strongly about this (the point being made clearly has some > > merit) make their case to trademarks@ as it's IMHO not really the task > > of the Incubator to be forming new policy on this, especially with all > > the recent talk about scaling down the ambitions of the IPMC. > > > > BR, > > > > Jukka Zitting > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > -- > Daniel Kulp > dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > -- Thanks - Mohammad Nour ---- "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving" - Albert Einstein
