Whether or not the actions should have been "FIRST" taken in private, this is now a retrospective where we provide oversight for the overseers.
I reiterate again that all discussions and actions undertaken should be made public. *This community* has just been charged with judging if the board acted appropriately. You have not. We cannot make that judgement without the facts. On 5 November 2016 at 13:30, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> wrote: > Having a bit insight how the board operates (being PMC-chair for 2 other > TLPs) I can ensure you that the board did handle this very cleanly! > > A few things really should FIRST get handled in private. This is the same > regardless whether it's about board oversight or you as a PMC. > > An example is e.g. when we detect trademark violations. Or if ASF hosted > pages make unfair advertisement for ONE of the involved contributors. In > such cases the PMC (or board if the PMC doesn't act by itself) first tries > to solve those issues _without_ breaking porcelain! Which means the > respective person or company will get contacted in private and not > immediately get hit by public shaming and blaming. In most cases it's just > an oversight and too eager marketing people who don't understand the > impact. Usually the problems quickly get resolved without anyone loosing > it's face. > > > Oh, talking about the 'impact' and some people wondering why the ASF board > is so pissed? > Well, the point is that in extremis the whole §501(c),3 (non-for-profit) > status is at risk! Means if we allow a single vendor to create an unfair > business benefit, then this might be interpreted as a profit making > mechanism by the federal tax office... > This is one of the huge differences to some other OSS projects which are > basically owned by one company or where companies simply can buy a seat in > the board. > > > LieGrue, > strub > > PS: I strongly believe that the technical people at DataStax really tried > to do their best but got out-maneuvered by their marketing and sales > people. The current step was just part of a clean separation btw a company > and their OSS contributions. It was legally necessary and also important > for the overall Cassandra community! > > > PPS: DataStax did a lot for Cassandra, but the public perception nowadays > seems to be that DataStax donated Cassandra to the ASF. This is not true. > It was created and contributed by Facebook > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Cassandramany years before DataStax was > even founded > > > > On Saturday, 5 November 2016, 13:12, Benedict Elliott Smith < > bened...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >I would hope the board would engage with criticism substantively, and > that "long emails" to boards@ would be responded to on their merit, > without a grassroots effort to apply pressure. > > > > > >In lieu of that, it is very hard for the community to "speak with one > voice" because we do not know what actions the board has undertaken. This > is at odds with "The Apache Way" core tenet of Openness. > > > > > >The actions I have seen on the public fora by both Chris and Mark make me > doubt the actions in private were reasonable. > > > > > > > >I reiterate that the board should make all of its discussions about > DataStax, particularly those with the PMC-private list, public. Otherwise > the community cannot perform the function you ask. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >On 5 November 2016 at 03:08, Ross Gardler <ross.gard...@microsoft.com> > wrote: > > > >[In the mail below I try not to cast judgement, I do not know enough of > the background to have an opinion on this specific situation. My comments > are in response to the question “Where are the board's guidelines then, or > do they make it up as they go?”.] > >> > >>The boards guidelines are the Apache Way. This is a fluid thing that > adapts to individual project needs but has a few common pillars in all > projects, e.g. PMC is responsible for community health and PMC members are > expected to act as individuals in the interest of the community. The board > is empowered, by the ASF membership (individuals with merit) to take any > action necessary to ensure a PMC is carrying out its duty. > >> > >>If a PMC is being ineffective then the board only has blunt instruments > to work with. Their actions appear to cut deep because they have no scalpel > with which to work. The scalpel should be in the hands of the PMC, but by > definition if the board intervenes the PMC is failing to use the scalpel. > >> > >>So how do we identify appropriate action? Well I can tell you that any > action of the board will result in more dissatisfied PMC members than > satisfied ones. This is because, by definition, if the board are acting it > is because the PMC is failing in its duty to build a vendor neutral and > healthy community. The measure is whether the broader community feel that > the board are acting in their best interests – including those who have not > been given the privilege of merit (yes, PMC membership and committership is > a privilege not a right). > >> > >>This is not to say the board are incapable of making a mistake. They are > 9 humans after all. However, I can assure you (based on painful experience) > that getting 9 humans to agree to use a blunt instrument that will make a > mess in the short term is extremely hard. That’s why we have a board of 9 > rather than 5 (or any other smaller number) it minimizes the chances of > error. It’s also why the board is usually slower to move than one might > expect. > >> > >>However, should the board make a mistake the correct action is to get > the community as a whole to express their concern. Demonstrate that the > community, as a whole, feels that the board acted inappropriately. Don’t > waste time with long emails to board@. The people here trust in the > process and the board. We don’t know what’s been happening inside your > project, we don’t pass judgement. To make us care you must have your > community speak with one voice. Demonstrate that you have consensus around > your opinions. Then, and only then, will the membership - the people who > vote for the board and hold them accountable – accept your argument that > the board have acted inappropriately. > >> > >>Ross > >> > >>From: Benedict Elliott Smith [mailto:bened...@apache.org] > >>Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 7:08 PM > >>To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > >>Cc: Apache Board <bo...@apache.org>; Łukasz Dywicki <l...@code-house.org>; > Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org>; Kelly Sommers < > kell.somm...@gmail.com>; Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> > >>Subject: Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF > >> > >>Where are the board's guidelines then, or do they make it up as they go? > Flame wars are a risk of every public forum and discussion, and doing > everything in public is one of the tenets of the ASF. > >> > >>Jim Jagielski stated to me on twitter that a bare minimum of discussions > happen in private, and did not list this as one of the exceptions, despite > it being the context. His statement was inline with the link I provided, > and he is a board member. So ostensibly a board member agrees, at least in > principle. > >> > >>Regardless, the issue in question is if the board was sufficiently > hostile to DataStax for them to rationally and reasonably feel the correct > course of action was to mitigate their business risk exposure to the ASF > board. It seems to me that may well be the case, but we cannot know for > sure because the board was doing it behind closed doors despite members of > the board suggesting this isn't how things work. > >> > >>Given this inconsistency, and the fact that Mark Thomas (a board member) > apparently hadn't even read the ASF guidelines before wantonly enforcing > them, and the composure of Chris, as pointed out by Russel, I think it is > reasonable to doubt the boards' credibility entirely. > >> > >>So, I'm asking for clarity. Preferably, a complete publication of the > discussions that happened in private on the topic. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>On Saturday, 5 November 2016, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi<mailt > o:tom.bar...@meteorite.bi>> wrote: > >>You know you've linked to a PMC page, when the board isn't a PMC? For > >>example, board member a, thinks project X isn't doing things correctly > and > >>their first course of action is to post notes on a public development > >>mailing list? You'd have arguments and flame wars left right and centre. > >> > >>Having watched the discussion unfolding, whilst some discussion clearly > >>went on on a private mailing list, the details pertinent to the PMC were > >>made available and I believe they were CC'd pretty regularly. > >> > >>I won't answer directly for the board for #2, but I suspect the answer > >>would be, Cassandra has been through the incubation phase, so the PMC > >>should understand how the project should be run, its not the boards job > to > >>fix it directly. Did the board act unreasonably? I don't think so. Did > some > >>heated discussions take place? Undoubtedly. > >> > >> > >> > >>On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 12:28 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith < > bened...@apache.org<javascrip t:;> > >>> wrote: > >> > >>> This discussion is bundling up two issues: > >>> > >>> 1) Did DataStax have an outsized role on the project which needed to be > >>> offset, preferably with increased participation? > >>> > >>> 2) Did the Board behave reasonably in trying to fix it? > >>> > >>> As far as I can tell the answers are 1) Yes, 2) No > >>> > >>> Can the board please now unequivocally answer if they followed protocol > >>> and kept all discussions around company involvement to public mailing > lists? > >>> > >>> https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc .html#mailing-list-private<htt > ps://na01.safelinks.protection .outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F% > 2Fwww.apache.org%2Fdev%2Fpmc.h tml%23mailing-list-private&dat > a=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40mic rosoft.com%7C5c04c4a66e0946fb5 > 76908d4052086e2%7C72f988bf86f1 41af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0% > 7C636139084643734494&sdata= OCEuwt1KWAv6e586vEixFLQfAJOWbL > pvb9kpKw9TwLI%3D&reserved=0> > >>> > >>> I'm certain they did not, and they cannot as a result claim to be > >>> upholding ASF process and ideals. Similarly to how Mark Thomas > recently > >>> attempted to misapply ASF policies, when policing user mailing > >>> list discussions. > >>> > >>> I originally supported the ASF efforts to improve the project. I have > >>> since lost all faith in the board. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >>> On Saturday, 5 November 2016, Chris Mattmann > >>> <mattm...@apache.org<javascrip > t:;>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Thank you for sending this. I am not going to reply in depth now, but > >>>> will do so to Kelly and > >>>> others over the weekend, but this is *precisely* the reason that I > have > >>>> been so emphatic > >>>> about trying to get the PMC to see the road they have already gone > done > >>>> and the ship that > >>>> has already set sail. > >>>> > >>>> Those not familiar with Lucene and its vote to merge Lucene/Solr may > want > >>>> to Google the > >>>> Apache archives around 2010 and see some of the effects of Individual > >>>> organizations and > >>>> vendors driving supposedly vendor neutral Apache projects. It’s not > even > >>>> conjecture at this > >>>> point in Cassandra. The Board has acted as Greg referred to > else-thread, > >>>> and we asked Jonathan & the > >>>> PMC to find a new chair (rotation is healthy yes, but we also need the > >>>> chair to be the eyes > >>>> and ears of the Board and we asked for a change there). Mark Thomas > from > >>>> the Apache Board > >>>> also has a set of actions that he is working with the PMC having to do > >>>> with trademarks and > >>>> other items to move towards more independent governance. > >>>> > >>>> Your experience that you cite below Lukasz is precisely one I found in > >>>> Lucene/Solr, Hadoop, > >>>> Maven, and other projects. Sometimes the ship has been righted – for > >>>> example in all of these > >>>> projects they have moved towards much more independent governance, > >>>> welcoming to contributors, > >>>> and shared community for the project. However, in other cases (see > >>>> IBATIS), it didn’t work out, for > >>>> various reasons including community issues, but also > misunderstandings as > >>>> to the way that the > >>>> ASF works. I know my own experience of being an unpaid, occasional > >>>> contributor to some open > >>>> source projects has put me to a disadvantage even in some ASF projects > >>>> driven by a single vendor. > >>>> I’ve also been paid to work on open source (at the ASF and elsewhere) > and > >>>> in doing so, been on the > >>>> other side of the code. That’s why ASF projects and my own work in > >>>> particular I strive to try and > >>>> remain neutral and to address these types of issues by being > welcoming, > >>>> lower the bar to committership > >>>> and PMC, and moving “contributors” to having a vote/shared governance > of > >>>> the project at the ASF. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for sending this email and your insights are welcome below. The > >>>> Apache Board should hear this > >>>> too so I am CC’ing them. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Chris > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 11/4/16, 5:03 PM, "Łukasz Dywicki" <l...@code-house.org<javascrip > t:;>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Good evening, > >>>> I feel myself a bit called to table by both Kelly and Chris. > Thing is > >>>> I don’t know personally nor have any relationship with both of you. > I’m not > >>>> even ASF member. My tweet was simply reaction for Kelly complaints > about > >>>> ASF punishing out DataStax. Kelly timeline also contained statement > such > >>>> "forming a long term strategy to grow diversity around” which > reminded me > >>>> my attempts to collaborate on Cassandra and Tinkerpop projects to > grow such > >>>> diversity. I collected message links and quotes and put it into gist > who > >>>> could be read by anyone: > >>>> https://gist.github.com/splat ch/aebe4ad4d127922642bee0dc9a8 > b1ec1<https://na01.safelinks.p rotection.outlook.com/?url=htt ps%3A%2F% > 2Fgist.github.com%2Fs platch%2Faebe4ad4d127922642bee > 0dc9a8b1ec1&data=02%7C01%7CRos s.Gardler%40microsoft.com% > 7C5c04c4a66e0946fb576908d40520 86e2%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7 > cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6361390846 43734494&sdata=fyu1vH6AUhkW% > 2Bk%2FJmQhKsAH3kBmzxPXEs8bt161 SPXU%3D&reserved=0> > >> > >>>> > >>>> I don’t want to bring now these topics back and disscuss technical > >>>> stuff over again. It happened to me in the past to refuse (or vote > against) > >>>> some change proposals in other Apache projects I am involved. I was > on the > >>>> other ("bad guy") side multiple times. I simply collected public > records of > >>>> interactions with DataStax staff I was aware, simply because of my > personal > >>>> involvement. It shown how some ideas, yet cassandra mailing list > don’t have > >>>> many of these coming from externals, are getting put a side with very > >>>> little or even lack of will to pull in others people work in. This is > >>>> blocking point for anyone coming from external sides to get involved > into > >>>> project and help it growing. If someone changes requires moves in > project > >>>> core or it’s public APIs that person will require support from project > >>>> members to get this done. If such help will not be given it any > outside > >>>> change will be ever completed and noone will invest time in doing > something > >>>> more than fixing typos or common programmer errors which we all do > from > >>>> time to time. Despite of impersonal nature of communications in > Internet we > >>>> still do have human interactions and we all have just one chance to > make > >>>> first impression. If we made it wrong at beginning its hard to fix it > later > >>>> on. > >>>> Some decisions made in past by project PMCs lead to situation that > >>>> project was forked and maintained outside ASF (ie. stratio cassandra > which > >>>> eventually ended up as lucene indexes plugin over a year ago), some > other > >>>> did hurt users running cassandra for long time (ie. discontinuation of > >>>> thrift). Especially second decission was seen by outsiders, who do not > >>>> desire billion writes per second, as marketing driven. This led to > people > >>>> looking and finding alternatives using compatible interface which > might be, > >>>> ironically, even faster (ie. scylladb). > >>>> > >>>> And since there was quote battle on twitter between Jim Jagielski > and > >>>> Benedict, I can throw some in as well. Over conferences I attended > and even > >>>> during consultancy services I got, I’ve spoken with some people having > >>>> records of DataStax in their resumes and even them told me > "collaboration > >>>> with them [cassandra team] was hard". Now imagine how outsider will > get any > >>>> chance to get any change done with such attitude shown even to own > >>>> colleagues? Must also note that Tinkerpop is getting better on this > field > >>>> since it has much more generic nature. > >>>> I don’t think this whole topic is to say that you (meaning > DataStax) > >>>> made wrong job, or you are doing wrong for project but about letting > others > >>>> join forces with you to make Cassandra even better. Maybe there is > not a > >>>> lot of people currently walking around but once you will welcome and > help > >>>> them working with you on code base you may be sure that others will > join > >>>> making your development efforts easier and shared across community. > >>>> > >>>> Kind regards, > >>>> Lukasz > >>>> > >>>> > Wiadomość napisana przez Edward Capriolo > >>>> <edlinuxg...@gmail.com<javascr > ipt:;>> w > >>>> dniu 4 lis 2016, o godz. 18:55: > >>>> > > >>>> > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Kelly Sommers < > >>>> kell.somm...@gmail.com<javascr ipt:;>> > >> > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> >> I think the community needs some clarification about what's > going > >>>> on. > >>>> >> There's a really concerning shift going on and the story about > why > >>>> is > >>>> >> really blurry. I've heard all kinds of wild claims about what's > >>>> going on. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I've heard people say the ASF is pushing DataStax out because > they > >>>> don't > >>>> >> like how much control they have over Cassandra. I've heard > other > >>>> people say > >>>> >> DataStax and the ASF aren't getting along. I've heard one > person > >>>> who has > >>>> >> pull with a friend in the ASF complained about a feature not > >>>> getting > >>>> >> considered (who also didn't go down the correct path of > proposing) > >>>> kicked > >>>> >> and screamed and started the ball rolling for control change. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I don't know what's going on, and I doubt the truth is in any > of > >>>> those, the > >>>> >> truth is probably somewhere in between. As a former Cassandra > MVP > >>>> and > >>>> >> builder of some of the larger Cassandra clusters in the last 3 > >>>> years I'm > >>>> >> concerned. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I've been really happy with Jonathan and DataStax's role in the > >>>> Cassandra > >>>> >> community. I think they have done a great job at investing time > >>>> and money > >>>> >> towards the good interest in the project. I think it is > >>>> unavoidable a > >>>> >> single company bootstraps large projects like this into > >>>> popularity. It's > >>>> >> those companies investments who give the ability to grow > diversity > >>>> in later > >>>> >> stages. The committer list in my opinion is the most diverse > its > >>>> ever been, > >>>> >> hasn't it? Apple is a big player now. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I don't think reducing DataStax's role for the sake of > diversity > >>>> is smart. > >>>> >> You grow diversity by opening up new opportunities for others. > >>>> Grow the > >>>> >> committer list perhaps. Mentor new people to join that list. > You > >>>> don't kick > >>>> >> someone to the curb and hope things improve. You add. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I may be way off on what I'm seeing but there's not much to go > by > >>>> but > >>>> >> gossip (ahaha :P) and some ASF meeting notes and DataStax blog > >>>> posts. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> August 17th 2016 ASF changed the Apache Cassandra chair > >>>> >> https://www.apache.org/foundat ion/records/minutes/<https://n > a01.safelinks.protection.outlo ok.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww. > apache.org%2Ffoundation%2Freco > rds%2Fminutes%2F&data=02%7C01% 7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft. > com%7C5c04c4a66e0946fb576908d4 052086e2%7C72f988bf86f141af91a > b2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0% 7C636139084643734494&sdata= > tUnCACcUzARHCi4ZIz3nf3kUPSQkjK sZaCF96e3E5ac%3D&reserved=0> > >>>> >> 2016/board_minutes_2016_08_17. txt > >>>> >> > >>>> >> "The Board expressed continuing concern that the PMC was not > acting > >>>> >> independently and that one company had undue influence over the > >>>> project." > >>>> >> > >>>> >> August 19th 2016 Jonothan Ellis steps down as chair > >>>> >> http://www.datastax.com/2016/0 8/a-look-back-a-look-forward<h > ttps://na01.safelinks.protecti on.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F % > 2Fwww.datastax.com%2F2016%2F0 8%2Fa-look-back-a-look-forward > &data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler% 40microsoft.com%7C5c04c4a66e09 > 46fb576908d4052086e2%7C72f988b f86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1% > 7C0%7C636139084643734494& sdata=5De2ySsguPY381uaQyrS4UaD > MI0am5rNZhn7YtaiwSs%3D&reserve d=0> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> November 2nd 2016 DataStax moves committers to DSE from > Cassandra. > >>>> >> http://www.datastax.com/2016/1 1/serving-customers-serving-th > <https://na01.safelinks.protec tion.outlook.com/?url=http%3A% 2F% > 2Fwww.datastax.com%2F2016%2 F11%2Fserving-customers-servin > g-th&data=02%7C01%7CRoss. Gardler%40microsoft.com% > 7C5c04c4a66e0946fb576908d40520 86e2%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7 > cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6361390846 43734494&sdata=vqI4LOx%2Btpmgs > mQMgLqRGeW3%2Fg0Q%2BeERrxqNkP1 jYb8%3D&reserved=0> > >> > >>>> e-community > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I'm really concerned if indeed the ASF is trying to change > control > >>>> and > >>>> >> diversity of organizations by reducing DataStax's role. As I > said > >>>> earlier, > >>>> >> I've been really happy at the direction DataStax and Jonathan > has > >>>> taken the > >>>> >> project and I would much prefer see additional opportunities > along > >>>> side > >>>> >> theirs grow instead of subtracting. The ultimate question > that's > >>>> really > >>>> >> important is whether DataStax and Jonathan have been steering > the > >>>> project > >>>> >> in the right direction. If the answer is yes, then is there > really > >>>> anything > >>>> >> broken? Only if the answer is no should change happen, in my > >>>> opinion. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Can someone at the ASF please clarify what is going on? The ASF > >>>> meeting > >>>> >> notes are very concerning. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Thank you for listening, > >>>> >> Kelly Sommers > >>>> >> > >>>> > > >>>> > Kelly, > >>>> > > >>>> > Thank you for taking the time to mention this. I want to react > to > >>>> this > >>>> > statement: > >>>> > > >>>> > "I've heard people say the ASF is pushing DataStax out because > they > >>>> don't > >>>> > like how much control they have over Cassandra. I've heard other > >>>> people say > >>>> > DataStax and the ASF aren't getting along. I've heard one person > >>>> who has > >>>> > pull with a friend in the ASF complained about a feature not > getting > >>>> > considered (who also didn't go down the correct path of > proposing) > >>>> kicked > >>>> > and screamed and started the ball rolling for control change." > >>>> > > >>>> > There is an important saying in the ASF: > >>>> > https://community.apache.org/n ewbiefaq.html<https://na01.saf > elinks.protection.outlook.com/ ?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.a > pache.org%2Fnewbiefaq.html&dat > a=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40mic rosoft.com%7C5c04c4a66e0946fb5 > 76908d4052086e2%7C72f988bf86f1 41af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0% > 7C636139084643734494&sdata= l5vVCp%2FEn4QFXIfnAFWGulr2J6ZD > zAsS8jdVNyAT1%2F8%3D&reserved= 0> > >> > >>>> > > >>>> > - If it didn't happen on a mailing list, it didn't happen. > >>>> > > >>>> > It is natural that communication happens outside of Jira. The > rough > >>>> aim of > >>>> > this mandate is a conversation like that that happens by the > water > >>>> cooler > >>>> > should be summarized and moved into a forum where it can be > >>>> recorded and > >>>> > discussed. There is a danger in repeating something anecdotal or > >>>> 'things > >>>> > you have heard'. If that party is being suppressed, that is an > >>>> issue to > >>>> > deal with. If a party is unwilling to speak for themselves > publicly > >>>> in the > >>>> > ASF public forums that is on them. Retelling what others told > us is > >>>> > 'gossip' as you put it. > >>>> > > >>>> > "I think it is unavoidable a single company bootstraps large > >>>> projects like > >>>> > this into popularity" > >>>> > "I don't think reducing DataStax's role for the sake of > diversity is > >>>> > smart." > >>>> > > >>>> > Let me state my opinion as an open source ASF member that was > never > >>>> > directly payed to work on an open source project. I have > proposed > >>>> and seen > >>>> > proposed by others ideas to several open source projects inside > >>>> (ASF and > >>>> > outside) which were rejected. Later (months maybe years later) > the > >>>> exact > >>>> > idea or roughly the same idea is implemented by different > person in > >>>> a > >>>> > slightly different form. There is a lot of grey area there. > >>>> > > >>>> > How does that related to this http://www.datastax.com/2016/< > https://na01.safelinks.protect ion.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2 F% > 2Fwww.datastax.com%2F2016%2F &data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler% > 40microsoft.com%7C5c04c4a66e09 > 46fb576908d4052086e2%7C72f988b f86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1% > 7C0%7C636139084643744506&sdata =6Pn5o6Abfuy84NltYW7CoTaRvUxss > QO0d%2Bh9nq%2FpUMs%3D&reserved =0> > >> > >> > >>>> > 11/serving-customers-serving-t he-community ? > >>>> > > >>>> > Remember the ASF is a volunteer organization. One desired > effect of > >>>> the > >>>> > volunteerism is so that one single large company does not > bootstrap > >>>> or > >>>> > control the project. (When my proposed ideas got knocked down, I > >>>> had some > >>>> > choices including complain to anyone that will listen, lick my > >>>> wounds and > >>>> > press on, or become less involved.) > >>>> > > >>>> > Whatever event has happened has happened. Like you, I only know > of > >>>> it > >>>> > second hand so I will not comment. > >>>> > > >>>> > The volunteer committers can decide their own level of > involvement. > >>>> For > >>>> > example, they can "double down" and use their free time to stay > >>>> > involved. They can attempt to convince their organization that > >>>> pulling them > >>>> > back is the wrong move, or they can fall away. > >>>> > > >>>> > " The ultimate question that's really important is whether > DataStax > >>>> and > >>>> > Jonathan have been steering the project in the right direction" > >>>> > > >>>> > Outside of the politics/litigation it is becoming normal for an > ASF > >>>> project > >>>> > to rotate the PMC chair. It keeps things fresh, and helps avoid > >>>> issues > >>>> > where some may perceive control by one person/entity. Your > question > >>>> may > >>>> > ultimately highlight an issue as ASF sees it, namely who is > >>>> "steering" you > >>>> > mention a corporate entity in your question. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > > > > > > > > >
