Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

Closing the loop on seeking consensus for UX/UI/API changes, I see a few options. Can we rank choice vote please? A - Jira suffices B - Post a DISCUSS API thread prior to making changes C - Periodically publish a list of API changes for retrospective consideration by the community Points

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

If we expose internal mechanics to public APIs, we should probably document what our promises are - ie none, even between patch versions.So we can close out this discussion, let’s assume we’re only discussing any interfaces we want to make promises for. We can have a separate discussion about

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

I guess that depends on the type of change, and what we consider an API. If it's a breaking change, like removing a method or property, I think we would need a DISCUSS API thread prior to making changes. However, if the change is an addition, like adding a new yaml property or a JMX method, I

Re: Apache Cassandra 5.0 documentation

I did check it when it was originally posted, I had no major concerns :-) On 2/2/23 7:14, Mick Semb Wever wrote: No objections from me! And yes, 7 days have passed and no one has spoken up, you're a committer – you can assume silence is consent. Folks, Lorina's proposal here is very

Re: Cassandra 5.0 Documentation Plan

This looks good to me, thanks Lorina > On 1 Feb 2023, at 19:24, Lorina Poland wrote: > >  > Hey all - > > I presented a potential Docs Information Architecture recently, and promised > a Doc Plan for the upcoming C* 5.0 release. Please give me feedback, > especially if you feel that the

Re: Apache Cassandra 5.0 documentation

I also looked at it and I do not have any objections. I also think lazy consensus can be assumed: https://community.apache.org/committers/lazyConsensus.html On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 at 3:44, Berenguer Blasi wrote: > I did check it when it was originally posted, I had no major concerns :-) > On

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

“ So we can close out this discussion, let’s assume we’re only discussing any interfaces we want to make promises for. We can have a separate discussion about which those are if there is any disagreement.” May I suggest we first clear this topic and then move to voting? I would say I see

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

I think it’s fine to separate the systems from the policy? We are agreeing a policy for systems we want to make guarantees about to our users (regarding maintenance and compatibility)For me, this is (at minimum) CQL and virtual tables. But I don’t think the policy differs based on the contents of

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

While I do agree with you, I am thinking that if we include many things that we would expect lazy consensus on I would probably have different preference. I definitely don’t mean to stall this though so in that case: I’d say combination of A+C (jira with heads up on the ML if someone is

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

Bringing light to new proposed APIs no less important - if not more, for reasons already mentioned in this thread. For it’s not easy to change them later. Voting B. > On 2 Feb 2023, at 10:15, Andrés de la Peña wrote: > > If it's a breaking change, like removing a method or property, I think

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

I think lazy consensus is fine for all of these things. If a DISCUSS thread is crickets, or just positive responses, then definitely it can proceed without further ceremony.I think “with heads-up to the mailing list” is very close to B? Only that it locks out of the conversation anyone without a

Re: Cassandra 5.0 Documentation Plan

I second Benedict, thanks Lorina On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 at 7:54, Benedict wrote: > This looks good to me, thanks Lorina > > On 1 Feb 2023, at 19:24, Lorina Poland wrote: > >  > > Hey all - > > I presented a potential Docs Information Architecture recently, and > promised a Doc Plan for the

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

“ Only that it locks out of the conversation anyone without a Jira login” Very valid point I forgot about - since recently people need invitation in order to create account… Then I would say C until we clarify the scope. Thanks On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 at 8:54, Benedict wrote: > I think lazy

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

Things I think of as API's: 1. nodetool output (user tooling couples with this) 2. CQL syntax 3. JMX 4. VTables 5. Potential future refactored and deliberately exposed API interfaces (SSTables, custom indexes, etc) API's persist; I don't think lazy consensus to favor velocity is the right

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

I’m inclined to agree with Jeremiah and Patrick, even if it might be a steep jump from what we’ve been used to. CQL needs to be treated with the utmost care and attention to detail. Would we apply the same standard to semantic bug fixes too? Perhaps we should, where there isn’t an urgent timeline

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

API changes are near and dear to my world. The scope of changes could be minor or major, so I think B is the right way forward. Not to throw off the momentum, but could this even warrant a separate CEP in some cases? For example, CEP-15 is a huge change, but the CQL syntax will continuously

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

> if a patch adds, say, a single JMX method to expose the > metric, having an ML thread for it may seem redundant My fear is someone missing that there's an idiom or pattern within the codebase for metrics they miss then we end up with inconsistent metric names / groups exposed to users.

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

I think we need a DISCUSS thread at minimum for API changes. And for anything changing CQL syntax, I think a CEP is warranted. Even if it is only a small change to the syntax. > On Feb 2, 2023, at 9:32 AM, Patrick McFadin wrote: > > API changes are near and dear to my world. The scope of

Re: [DISCUSS] API modifications and when to raise a thread on the dev ML

Hello everyone, I would say that having a CEP and a well-defined set of major public API changes is a must, and the corresponding discussion of CEP is also well-defined here [1]. This ensures that we do not miss any important changes. Everything related to the public API is also described in the

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congratulations, Patrick! Kind Regards, Brandon On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 11:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted > the invitation to become committer today. > > Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Patrick FTW!!! On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 12:32 PM Joseph Lynch wrote: > W! Congratulations Patrick!! > > -Joey > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > >> The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted >> the invitation to become committer today.

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats!On Feb 2, 2023, at 12:47 PM, Christopher Bradford wrote:Congrats Patrick! Well done. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:44 AM Aaron Ploetz wrote:Patrick FTW!!!On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 12:32 PM Joseph Lynch wrote:W! Congratulations

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats, Patrick! On 2023/02/02 19:52:35 Jean-Armel Luce wrote: > Congrats, Patrick > > Le jeu. 2 févr. 2023 à 20:46, David Capwell a écrit : > > > Congrats and welcome! =) > > > > On Feb 2, 2023, at 10:53 AM, J. D. Jordan > > wrote: > > > > Congrats! > > > > On Feb 2, 2023, at 12:47 PM,

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congratulations Patrick! > > On Feb 2, 2023, at 9:58 AM, Benjamin Lerer wrote: > >  > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted > the invitation to become committer today. > > Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this project and its >

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats! On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted > the invitation to become committer today. > > Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this project and > its community through the years.

Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted the invitation to become committer today. Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this project and its community through the years. Congratulations and welcome! The Apache Cassandra PMC members

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats, Patrick! On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted > the invitation to become committer today. > > Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this project and > its community through

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats, Patrick!! Cheng On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:24 AM Jordan West wrote: > Congratulations Patrick! Well deserved. > > Jordan > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:18 Brandon Williams wrote: > >> Congratulations, Patrick! >> >> Kind Regards, >> Brandon >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 11:58 AM

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

W! Congratulations Patrick!! -Joey On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted > the invitation to become committer today. > > Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this project and > its

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats, Patrick Le jeu. 2 févr. 2023 à 20:46, David Capwell a écrit : > Congrats and welcome! =) > > On Feb 2, 2023, at 10:53 AM, J. D. Jordan > wrote: > > Congrats! > > On Feb 2, 2023, at 12:47 PM, Christopher Bradford > wrote: > >  > Congrats Patrick! Well done. > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Wow Patrick, this is great! From: Benjamin Lerer Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 18:58 To: dev@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congratulations Patrick! Thanks Sharan On Thu, 2 Feb 2023, 18:58 Benjamin Lerer, wrote: > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted > the invitation to become committer today. > > Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this project and > its

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats Patrick! Well done. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:44 AM Aaron Ploetz wrote: > Patrick FTW!!! > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 12:32 PM Joseph Lynch > wrote: > >> W! Congratulations Patrick!! >> >> -Joey >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: >> >>> The PMC members are

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats Patrick  On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 at 12:58, Benjamin Lerer wrote: > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted > the invitation to become committer today. > > Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for this project and > its community through the

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats !!! - - -- --- - - Jacek Lewandowski czw., 2 lut 2023 o 19:10 Melissa Logan napisał(a): > Congrats, Patrick! > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > >> The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted >> the

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congratulations Patrick! Well deserved. Jordan On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:18 Brandon Williams wrote: > Congratulations, Patrick! > > Kind Regards, > Brandon > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 11:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > > > > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats and welcome! =) > On Feb 2, 2023, at 10:53 AM, J. D. Jordan wrote: > > Congrats! > >> On Feb 2, 2023, at 12:47 PM, Christopher Bradford >> wrote: >> >>  >> Congrats Patrick! Well done. >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:44 AM Aaron Ploetz > > wrote:

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congratulations, Patrick! On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 at 19:54, Francisco Guerrero wrote: > Congrats, Patrick! > > On 2023/02/02 19:52:35 Jean-Armel Luce wrote: > > Congrats, Patrick > > > > Le jeu. 2 févr. 2023 à 20:46, David Capwell a > écrit : > > > > > Congrats and welcome! =) > > > > > > On Feb 2,

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Absolutely, a big woot for you, Patrick! Congratulations! Lorina On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 12:09 PM Sharan F wrote: > Congratulations Patrick! > > Thanks > Sharan > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2023, 18:58 Benjamin Lerer, wrote: > >> The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congratulations Patrick. I guess this is a good time to thank you for your mentorship as I have learned about and worked with the Cassandra community for 2½ years now. henrik On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 7:58 PM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats, Patrick... much deserved! On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 1:59 PM Derek Chen-Becker wrote: > Congrats! > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > >> The PMC members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted >> the invitation to become committer today. >> >>

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Congrats Patrick! Well deserved. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, at 5:25 PM, Molly Monroy wrote: > Congrats, Patrick... much deserved! > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 1:59 PM Derek Chen-Becker > wrote: >> Congrats! >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 10:58 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: >>> The PMC members are pleased

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Welcome! On 3/2/23 4:09, Vinay Chella wrote: Well deserved one, Congratulations, Patrick. On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 4:01 AM Josh McKenzie wrote: Congrats Patrick! Well deserved. On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, at 5:25 PM, Molly Monroy wrote: Congrats, Patrick... much deserved! On Thu,

Re: Welcome Patrick McFadin as Cassandra Committer

Well deserved one, Congratulations, Patrick. On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 4:01 AM Josh McKenzie wrote: > Congrats Patrick! Well deserved. > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023, at 5:25 PM, Molly Monroy wrote: > > Congrats, Patrick... much deserved! > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 1:59 PM Derek Chen-Becker > wrote: > >