Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

communication is none of those things. And THAT is > a problem, too (and it¹s NOT on the same level as mark issues, but if the > question is ³why did Datastax step back from the Apache Cassandra > project², it certainly helps explain why a company might want to do that). > > Let¹s build

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

Some clarification. Basically, there had been issues w/ DataStax and the PMC for a long, long time. It came somewhat to a head in Aug when there was a PR/Email about the "Cassandra Summit" with nary a mention of Apache at all. None. This was after months and months in trying to get DataStax to

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

And, as a reminder, this is my email in its entirety. Note how when show in full, it is hardly the nefarious posting one would have assumed from the small cutting shared so far. """ I've seen such issues come up before... The problem is not, per se, that the issues pop up; it happens and

Re: Review of Cassandra actions

"well written, cogent and on-topic" ... "reasoned rebuttal" You keep on using those words. I don't think they mean what you think they do. Some data points: o " A lot of extra power, like it or not (I have a feeling you quite like it, though)." o "you are being hotheaded, impulsive,

Re: Moderation

If this is your attempt to accept Chris' explanation, even if you don't agree with it, then you have not quite succeeded. If instead, this is your attempt to continue to heap fuel on a fire, and be just as aggressive as you paint others to be, then you have done quite well. I don't expect that

Re: Review of Cassandra actions

erested in throwing your weight around and causing havoc, destroying a >> community, rather than actually being motivated by improving the ASF. >> >> >>> On 11/05/2016 06:16 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> How about a nice game of chess? >>> >>&g

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

Which is what was done: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Cassandra.html > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Jeremy Hanna wrote: > > If the ASF is at risk with a single company allowed to dominate a project > then why couldn't the approach have been something like:

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

Please note that, yes, at time, there are discussion between the PMC and the board which are done either or the board@ list or in "private" on private@. This is between the board and the PMC, of course. However, why does it fall to the *board* to then bring that conversation to "the public".