Just for my understanding on this. Is the issue that the code has a copyright header on it or that it is copyright to a corporate entity?
On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 10:11, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > Especially for an optional feature with clear alternative implementations, >> this doesn't bother me at all. It's well within ASF policy to include >> permissively licensed code copyrighted by other people or entities. >> > > > We should be conscious of the problem if this was a crucial (and evolving) > part of the code that the project was dependent on, even if only the > optics of it are problematic. > > So long we're asked the question, and this is just an add-on feature that > the codebase is not dependent on, and no one has any objections then I'm > ok with it. > -- [image: DataStax Logo Square] <https://www.datastax.com/> *Mike Adamson* Engineering +1 650 389 6000 <16503896000> | datastax.com <https://www.datastax.com/> Find DataStax Online: [image: LinkedIn Logo] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_datastax&d=DwMFaQ&c=adz96Xi0w1RHqtPMowiL2g&r=IFj3MdIKYLLXIUhYdUGB0cTzTlxyCb7_VUmICBaYilU&m=uHzE4WhPViSF0rsjSxKhfwGDU1Bo7USObSc_aIcgelo&s=akx0E6l2bnTjOvA-YxtonbW0M4b6bNg4nRwmcHNDo4Q&e=> [image: Facebook Logo] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_datastax&d=DwMFaQ&c=adz96Xi0w1RHqtPMowiL2g&r=IFj3MdIKYLLXIUhYdUGB0cTzTlxyCb7_VUmICBaYilU&m=uHzE4WhPViSF0rsjSxKhfwGDU1Bo7USObSc_aIcgelo&s=ncMlB41-6hHuqx-EhnM83-KVtjMegQ9c2l2zDzHAxiU&e=> [image: Twitter Logo] <https://twitter.com/DataStax> [image: RSS Feed] <https://www.datastax.com/blog/rss.xml> [image: Github Logo] <https://github.com/datastax>
