Sounds like we have a general consensus from the project on being willing to accept the donation, should the current rights owners be interested in said donation.
> We've been working on this along with the python-driver (just haven't raised > it yet). Which they indicate they are. :) I'll follow up on this topic offline w/Mick. Thanks everyone for the good conversation and feedback on it. ~Josh On Mon, May 20, 2024, at 2:36 PM, Jordan West wrote: > I would also love to see CCM as an official side project. It is important to > the project and I personally use it regularly. > > Jordan > > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 7:55 AM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: >> __ >>> We do still have the issues of DSE-supporting code in it, as we do with the >>> drivers. I doubt any of us strongly object to it: there's no trickery >>> happening here on the user; but we should be aware of it and have a rough >>> direction sketched out for when someone else comes along wanting to add >>> support for their proprietary product. >> IMO as long as it's documented well at the outset and we have plans to >> slowly refactor to move it to clean boundaries (epic in JIRA anyone <3) so >> it can be extracted into a separately maintained module by folks that need >> it, I think we'd be in great shape. That'd also pave a path for others >> wanting to add support for their proprietary products as well. Win-win. >> >> There's always this chicken or egg problem w/things like ccm. Do people not >> contribute to it because it's out of the umbrella, or is it out of the >> umbrella because people don't need to contribute to it? >> >> I hadn't thought about other subprojects relying on it. That's a very good >> point. >> >> On Thu, May 16, 2024, at 4:48 AM, Jacek Lewandowski wrote: >>> +1 (my personal opinion) >>> >>> How to deal with the DSE-supporting code is a separate discussion IMO >>> >>> - - -- --- ----- -------- ------------- >>> Jacek Lewandowski >>> >>> >>> czw., 16 maj 2024 o 10:21 Berenguer Blasi <berenguerbl...@gmail.com> >>> napisał(a): >>>> __ >>>> +1 ccm is super useful >>>> >>>> On 16/5/24 10:09, Mick Semb Wever wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2024 at 16:24, Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> Right now ccm isn't formally a subproject of Cassandra or under >>>>>> governance of the ASF. Given it's an integral components of our CI as >>>>>> well as for local testing for many devs, and we now have more experience >>>>>> w/our muscle on IP clearance and ingesting / absorbing subprojects where >>>>>> we can't track down every single contributor to get an ICLA, seems like >>>>>> it might be worth revisiting the topic of donation of ccm to Apache. >>>>>> >>>>>> For what it's worth, Sylvain originally and then DataStax after transfer >>>>>> have both been incredible and receptive stewards of the projects and >>>>>> repos, so this isn't about any response to any behavior on their part. >>>>>> Structurally, however, it'd be better for the health of the project(s) >>>>>> long-term to have ccm promoted in. As far as I know there was strong >>>>>> receptivity to that donation in the past but the IP clearance was the >>>>>> primary hurdle. >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyone have any thoughts for or against? >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/riptano/ccm >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We've been working on this along with the python-driver (just haven't >>>>> raised it yet). It is recognised, like the python-driver, as a key >>>>> dependency that would best be in the project. >>>>> >>>>> Obtaining the CLAs should be much easier, the contributors to ccm are >>>>> less diverse, being more the people we know already. >>>>> >>>>> We do still have the issues of DSE-supporting code in it, as we do with >>>>> the drivers. I doubt any of us strongly object to it: there's no >>>>> trickery happening here on the user; but we should be aware of it and >>>>> have a rough direction sketched out for when someone else comes along >>>>> wanting to add support for their proprietary product. We also don't want >>>>> to be pushing downstream users to be having to create their own forks >>>>> either. >>>>> >>>>> Great to see general consensus (so far) in receiving it :) >>>>> >>
