Re: Review of Cassandra actions

2016-11-05 Thread Michael Kjellman
Thanks Jeff for your thoughtful comments. +100 Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 5, 2016, at 6:26 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > > I hope the other 7 members of the board take note of this response, > and other similar reactions on dev@ today. > > When Datastax violated trademark, they

Re: Moderation

2016-11-05 Thread Jonathan Haddad
I agree with Paul. Same boat, not a PMC / Datastax, just someone that cares a lot about this community. On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 3:04 PM paul cannon wrote: > I'm not a stakeholder here- I don't know Russell, I don't work for > Datastax, and I'm not a member of the ASF. > > For

Re: Review of Cassandra actions

2016-11-05 Thread Jeff Jirsa
I hope the other 7 members of the board take note of this response, and other similar reactions on dev@ today. When Datastax violated trademark, they acknowledged it and worked to correct it. To their credit, they tried to do the right thing. When the PMC failed to enforce problems, we

Re: Moderation

2016-11-05 Thread paul cannon
I'm not a stakeholder here- I don't know Russell, I don't work for Datastax, and I'm not a member of the ASF. For what little it's probably worth since I haven't "been elected to have a binding voice within the project", Russell's is exactly how I read the message from Chris Mattmann. Whether or

Re: Review of Cassandra actions

2016-11-05 Thread Dave Brosius
I take this response (a second time) as a pompous way to trivialize the responses of others as to the point of their points being meaningless to you. So either explain what this means, or accept the fact that you are as Chris is exactly what people are claiming you to be. Abnoxious bullies

Re: Moderation

2016-11-05 Thread Russell Bradberry
For the record, I never said anyone was attempting to make me “look bad”. I simply stated that his method of argument was to discredit me. Below I will break down his response, as I see it, and as others who have messaged me off list see it as well: “… You see I’ve been around since 2004 and

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Łukasz Dywicki
Dear Jeff and discussion participants, Plase find my replies in line. > From Jeff Jirsa w dniu 5 lis 2016, o godz. 17:37: > The thesis of your pasted gist is that you tried to contribute and were > pushed away. You hypothesize that it's done with lack of will to pull in > other

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Aleksey Yeschenko
I’d say they are interwoven with inappropriate passages that should have never been typed, and *all of them* came from ASF board members. I feel like it would be in the interest of Apache Cassandra, and the greater Apache community, to expose the way the board treats its volunteer PMC and

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Edward Capriolo
On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > My first reaction to seeing this come in was to laugh - not because it's > funny, but because the only other thing I could think to do was cry. You've > misinterpreted or misunderstood almost everything in this post, and

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

2016-11-05 Thread Michael Shuler
On 11/04/2016 06:43 PM, Jeff Beck wrote: > I run the local Cassandra User Group and I would love to help get the > community more involved. I would propose holding a night to add patches to > Cassandra some will be simple things like making sure some asserts have > proper messages with them etc,

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

2016-11-05 Thread Edward Capriolo
On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith wrote: > Hi Ed, > > I would like to try and clear up what I perceive to be some > misunderstandings. > > Aleksey is relating that for *complex* tickets there are desperately few > people with the expertise necessary to

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Marvin Humphrey
On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith wrote: > All I am demanding is that these "not public" actions be made > "open" and public, inline with ASF ideals. All of us on the Board feel very strongly about conversations happening in public -- in harmony with

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Ross Gardler
Jim already replied but I want to remove any doubt... If members of this community are unaware of the actions of the board in relation to this project it is a failing of the PMC not the board. See Jim's email for more... --- Twitter: @rgardler From: Benedict

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jeff Jirsa
My first reaction to seeing this come in was to laugh - not because it's funny, but because the only other thing I could think to do was cry. You've misinterpreted or misunderstood almost everything in this post, and instead of reflecting on your side of the interaction, you've attributed the

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
Thanks Jeff, that was very well put. I would quibble on one point, though: the ship has never sailed on topics of community. How the board acts towards the PMC and companies in the community matters a great deal for continuing relations, as well as for other projects. The question is: did the

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jeremy Hanna
Ultimately it doesn't matter now. The project has a bright future with the involvement of all individuals regardless of the company they work for. That's the important thing. > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Jeremy Hanna wrote: > > No it wasn't. You're citing the

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jeff Jirsa
I'm going to attempt to give the most complete answer I can without posting comments that were said with the expectation of privacy - it's not my place to violate that expectation. Some things discussed here are things I wouldn't typically mention in public (notably the topic of trademark

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jeremy Hanna
No it wasn't. You're citing the eventual and agreed upon outcome. I was talking about the approach which is clear in the dev and user list threads that the board was involved in. It is also apparently much more apparent in the private threads which apparently the PMC can make public. > On Nov

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

2016-11-05 Thread Jake Luciani
Hi Tyler, There is a nice guide now in the docs on how to contribute[1]. If you try it and find holes you can also help by contributing to those docs. -Jake [1]: http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/development/index.html On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Tyler Tolley

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

2016-11-05 Thread Tyler Tolley
Just want to weigh in my 2 cents. I've been following the dev list for quite a while and wanted to contribute. As I approached trying to handle some lhf, I couldn't find any instructions on how to check out, build, test or any guidance on coding standards and best practices. Maybe these existed

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Which is what was done: https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Cassandra.html > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Jeremy Hanna wrote: > > If the ASF is at risk with a single company allowed to dominate a project > then why couldn't the approach have been something like:

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Please note that, yes, at time, there are discussion between the PMC and the board which are done either or the board@ list or in "private" on private@. This is between the board and the PMC, of course. However, why does it fall to the *board* to then bring that conversation to "the public".

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jeff Jirsa
I agree - thanks for sending it, Lukasz. I think we can use it as a great learning opportunity - because nearly every point you made I find to be factually and objectively wrong, and the fact that members of the ASF take it at face value is part of the problem - poorly informed opinions on

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Jeremy Hanna
If the ASF is at risk with a single company allowed to dominate a project then why couldn't the approach have been something like: "great job on building a successful project and community. We think there is great potential for more involvement at the core contribution level. How can we work

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
How am I misunderstanding you? "not in public" == "private" The ASF trumpets openness, and you are now apparently campaigning for the opposite. All I am demanding is that these "not public" actions be made "open" and public, inline with ASF ideals. Ross indicated *this (Cassandra) community*

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Mark Struberg
You don't understand what I tried to say it seems: those actions HAVE been extensively discussed with both DataStax representatives and the Cassandra PMC since a LONG time. Just not in public. So this is nothing which just boiled up the last month - this really got pointed out amicably by the

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
Whether or not the actions should have been "FIRST" taken in private, this is now a retrospective where we provide oversight for the overseers. I reiterate again that all discussions and actions undertaken should be made public. *This community* has just been charged with judging if the board

Re: Moderation

2016-11-05 Thread Mark Struberg
Russel, I don't read that out of Chris' answer. He just tried to show how community development might look like if done a bit more openly. Do you mind going back to Chris' original reply and re-read it again? I've not interpreted it as anyone trying to make you look bad. Au contraire! txs and

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Mark Struberg
Having a bit insight how the board operates (being PMC-chair for 2 other TLPs) I can ensure you that the board did handle this very cleanly! A few things really should FIRST get handled in private. This is the same regardless whether it's about board oversight or you as a PMC. An example is

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

2016-11-05 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
Hi Ed, I would like to try and clear up what I perceive to be some misunderstandings. Aleksey is relating that for *complex* tickets there are desperately few people with the expertise necessary to review them. In some cases it can amount to several weeks' work, possibly requiring multiple

DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

2016-11-05 Thread Benedict Elliott Smith
I would hope the board would engage with criticism substantively, and that "long emails" to boards@ would be responded to on their merit, without a grassroots effort to apply pressure. In lieu of that, it is very hard for the community to "speak with one voice" because we do not know what actions

Re: Is there a way to do Read and Set at Cassandra level?

2016-11-05 Thread DuyHai Doan
"But then don't I need to evict for every batch of writes?" Yes, that's why I think an in-memory distributed data structure is the good fit for your scenario. Using a log structured merged tree like C* for this use-case is not the most efficient choice On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Kant

Re: Is there a way to do Read and Set at Cassandra level?

2016-11-05 Thread Kant Kodali
But then don't I need to evict for every batch of writes? I thought cache would make sense when reads/writes > 1 per say. What do you think? On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 3:33 AM, DuyHai Doan wrote: > "I have a requirement where I need to know last value that is written >

Re: Is there a way to do Read and Set at Cassandra level?

2016-11-05 Thread DuyHai Doan
"I have a requirement where I need to know last value that is written successfully so I could read that value and do some computation and include it in the subsequent write" Maybe keeping the last written value in a distributed cache is cheaper than doing a read before write in Cassandra ? On

Is there a way to do Read and Set at Cassandra level?

2016-11-05 Thread Kant Kodali
I have a requirement where I need to know last value that is written successfully so I could read that value and do some computation and include it in the subsequent write. For now we are doing read before write which significantly degrades the performance. Light weight transactions are more of a