Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

So my view is that the community is strongly built on consensus, so expressions of sentiment within the community have strong normative weight even without any specific legislative effect. You shouldn’t knowingly go against what appears to be a consensus (or even widely-held) view, even if it has n

Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

> but binding to the same extent 2 committers reviewing something we later need > to revert is binding. To elaborate a bit - what I mean is "it's a bar we apply to help establish a baseline level of consensus but it's very much a 2-way door". Obviously 2 committers +1'ing code is a formal agreed

Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

> Community voting is also entirely by consensus, there is no such thing as a > simple majority community vote, technical or otherwise. Ah hah! You're absolutely correct in that this isn't one of our "blessed" ways we vote. There's nothing written down about "committers are binding, simple major

November community meetings with mondayDB, PMC chair, and 5.0

Join us for our virtual community meetings in November including: - Tuesday, Nov. 28: 5.0 Release Preview - Thursday, Nov. 30: mondayDB - Crafting a Database from Scratch with Liran Brimer + The State of the Cassandra Development Community with Josh McKenzie Register: https://www.meet

Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

> The idea that agreeing things carefully costs us agility is one I cannot endorsenot one I can endorse 🙄On 1 Nov 2023, at 21:11, Benedict wrote:The project governance document does not list any kind of general purpose technical change vote. There are only three very specific kinds of community v

Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

The project governance document does not list any kind of general purpose technical change vote. There are only three very specific kinds of community vote: code contributions, CEP and release votes.  Community voting is also entirely by consensus, there is no such thing as a simple majority commun

Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

First off, I appreciate your time and attention on this stuff. Want to be up front about that since these kinds of discussions can get prickly all too easily. I'm *at least* as guilty as anyone else about getting my back up on stuff like this. Figuring out the right things to "harden" as shared

Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

Your conceptualisation implies no weight to the decision, as a norm is not binding?The community voting section mentions only three kinds of decision, and this was deliberate: code contributions, CEP and releases - the latter of which non-PMC members are only permitted to veto; their votes do not c

Re: [CMWG] November 1 meeting

Here are correct links for this month's recording and meeting notes. Meeting Notes: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/2023-11-01 Recording: https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/B9nFjAjUPhIpy1rf6ZaXWK_quWAakMM48gkfIyf1gKqFbqQiIWi72YDnqt9YwFSf.HqxDJ50FJk1BIUG7 Passcode: ^XA=$Nx6 O

Re: [CMWG] November 1 meeting

Meeting notes and recording are below. Patrick shared awesome keynotes that will be at Cassandra Summit. We're in the final stretch for event promotions, so please share far and wide. You can use posts in the social doc link below to promote Cassandra Summit, community events, video content and oth

Re: Development Dependencies documentation.

Following back up here - patch has been updated and is ready for review: https://github.com/apache/cassandra-website/pull/170 > On Oct 25, 2023, at 8:07 AM, Ekaterina Dimitrova > wrote: > > Hi Claude, > You are not wrong. Unfortunately, it is outdated. Abe Ratnofsky has a work in > progress p

Re: Push TCM (CEP-21) and Accord (CEP-15) to 5.1 (and cut an immediate 5.1-alpha1)

> That vote thread also did not reach the threshold; it was incorrectly > counted, as committer votes are not binding for procedural changes. I counted > at most 8 PMC +1 votes. This piqued my curiosity. Link to how we vote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Cassandra+Proje

Re: [CMWG] November 1 meeting

CMWG meeting starts in 20 minutes. Join via Zoom: *https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82210868338?pwd=V3hrV3BUd2duVU5mVkE4RWhBNDZ3Zz09*

Re: Immediately Deprecated Code

> My thought was that we have code that is intended to be used for a > specific time frame. > With your example of bloom filters, if that's on-disk then it is not to be removed. Specifically, code that is used in relation to a sstable format still listed in BigFormat.BigVersion (or BtiFormat.Bti

Re: Immediately Deprecated Code

My thought was that we have code that is intended to be used for a specific time frame. We should clean up the code base when that code is no longer used. But we don't have any good way to track that. This proposal was an attempt to provide signposts for removing such code. On Tue, Oct 31, 2023