Glad you are watching. I agree on the performance question.
We should ask to be included in any grandfathering and/or timed replacement. (A timed replacement was done for a particular JSON library that a lot of projects were using.) Regards, Dave > On Jun 30, 2017, at 12:21 PM, Matteo Merli <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes, I have been following the same LEGAL-303 Jira. > > At this point, RocksDB is a required dependency. It would not be hard to > have it optional and by default not included/required and provide > instruction (with licenssing warning) on the website on how to add support > for it. > > The difference would be mostly on the performance side. > (One concern there might be on people that download the distribution and do > a performance test with the default configuration and finds "not-stellar" > results, especially in terms of low latency) > > I'm also interested in see what will be the solution that other projects > will adopt (like Flink, Samza and Kafka) that depend heavily on RocksDb and > for which there is no current comparable replacement, unfortunately. > > > So, short answer, we can easily turn it off, but I'd hope to see a common > solution for all the Apache projects on this issue. > > Matteo > > > -- > Matteo Merli > <[email protected]> > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi - >> >> I was exploring the project in GitHub and I noticed a reference to >> RocksDB. As part of an Apache project it is important to make sure that all >> of the required dependencies have licenses that are compatible with the >> Apache License 2.0 and also that those licenses do not in anyway interfere >> with downstream consumer's rights to make use of the project code however >> they wish. >> >> There is a legal affairs committee which handles these questions. Resolved >> licenses are found here [1]. The mailing list is [email protected]. >> Each question is typically handled via JIRA. RocksDB has just been declared >> Category X which means it is not suitable. The discussion occurred here >> [2]. It did included that some projects are using RocksDB and this use may >> be grandfathered. >> >> Is RocksDB required for Pulsar? If so then we need to have a discussion. >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303 >> >> >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
