Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

2020-09-10 Thread Dinesh Joshi
> On Sep 10, 2020, at 2:10 PM, Joshua McKenzie wrote: > > I can offer my anecdata: I know of two major enterprises as well as have > had two interviewees unsolicited bring up to me that they have walked away > from or bounced off the project due to the feature freeze / branching > strategy. I

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

2020-09-10 Thread Jeff Jirsa
> On Sep 10, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Benedict Elliott Smith > wrote: > >  >> >> As I understand Sankalp's primary (and quite reasonable) argument the last >> time we discussed this > > The more significant cost to the project is distracting contributors focused > on 4.0. The project is

Re: [DISCUSS] Next steps for Kubernetes operator SIG

2020-09-10 Thread John Sanda
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 5:27 PM Josh McKenzie wrote: > There's basically 1 java driver in the C* ecosystem. We have 3? 4? or more > operators in the ecosystem. Has one of them hit a clear supermajority of > adoption that makes it the de facto default and makes sense to pull it into > the

Re: [DISCUSS] Next steps for Kubernetes operator SIG

2020-09-10 Thread John Sanda
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:58 AM wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks John for your efforts in setting up the repo and in the SIG > meetings in general :) > > As the team already in charge for CasKop, we did not participate in the > code in your repo for different reasons: > - we never said we would. We

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

2020-09-10 Thread Mick Semb Wever
Replies inline, though I think Josh answered everything well enough already. > The effort of the cassandra-5.0 branch maintenance: rebasing (git rerere); > > is just upon those that wish to take it on > > > I don't follow. If a bug fix goes into 4.0 do we not need to sync this > with 5.0, if so

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

2020-09-10 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
> As I understand Sankalp's primary (and quite reasonable) argument the last > time we discussed this The more significant cost to the project is distracting contributors focused on 4.0. The project is bandwidth constrained right now. Feature development doesn't happen in a vacuum, and some

Re: [DISCUSS] Next steps for Kubernetes operator SIG

2020-09-10 Thread Josh McKenzie
There's basically 1 java driver in the C* ecosystem. We have 3? 4? or more operators in the ecosystem. Has one of them hit a clear supermajority of adoption that makes it the de facto default and makes sense to pull it into the project? We as a project community were pretty slow to move on

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

2020-09-10 Thread Joshua McKenzie
I can offer my anecdata: I know of two major enterprises as well as have had two interviewees unsolicited bring up to me that they have walked away from or bounced off the project due to the feature freeze / branching strategy. I may be the anomaly given the volume of people in the ecosystem I

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

2020-09-10 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
> We know we are turning away more and more contributions Do we? I haven't been aware of much of this occurring at all. On 10/09/2020, 20:58, "Mick Semb Wever" wrote: We know we are turning away more and more contributions and new potential dev community with our 4.0 feature freeze,

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

2020-09-10 Thread David Capwell
> > The effort of the cassandra-5.0 branch maintenance: rebasing (git rerere); > is just upon those that wish to take it on I don't follow. If a bug fix goes into 4.0 do we not need to sync this with 5.0, if so then this would be the 5th branch to keep in-sync, and if the feature freeze is

Notification of analysis on publicly available project data

2020-09-10 Thread Griselda Cuevas
Dear PMC, I’m contacting you because your project has been selected by the ASF D committee which is leading a research project to evaluate and understand the current state of diversity in our community [1]. As part of this research, we will analyze publicly available data about your project such

Re: [DISCUSS] Next steps for Kubernetes operator SIG

2020-09-10 Thread franck.dehay
Sorry forgot to mention that we finished the backup/restore with the help of Instaclustr! Sorry guys! > On 10 Sep 2020, at 16:58, DEHAY Franck DTSI/DSI > wrote: > > Hi, > > Thanks John for your efforts in setting up the repo and in the SIG meetings > in general :) > > As the team already

Re: [DISCUSS] Next steps for Kubernetes operator SIG

2020-09-10 Thread franck.dehay
Hi, Thanks John for your efforts in setting up the repo and in the SIG meetings in general :) As the team already in charge for CasKop, we did not participate in the code in your repo for different reasons: - we never said we would. We discussed the CRD in the SIG meetings and our objective

Re: [DISCUSS] Next steps for Kubernetes operator SIG

2020-09-10 Thread Tolbert, Andy
Hi John, Thank you for your efforts on getting this bootstrapped! I have been meaning to try getting involved for months and appreciate that the SIG has been recording sessions and taking down notes. > * Should we continue down the path of trying to build a common operator > project? If yes,

Re: [DISCUSS] CEP-7 Storage Attached Index

2020-09-10 Thread Jasonstack Zhao Yang
Thank you Patrick for hosting Cassandra Contributor Meeting for CEP-7 SAI. The recorded video is available here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/2020-09-01+Apache+Cassandra+Contributor+Meeting On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 14:34, Jasonstack Zhao Yang wrote: > Thank you, Charles