He already showed himself a good man by apologizing. Please, no more mudslinging. We're on the same team here. On Jun 4, 2016 2:22 PM, "Michael Kjellman" <mkjell...@internalcircle.com> wrote:
> No need to argue your point to me anymore. I've already tuned you out. > > These are good people who I consider my friends and insulting people just > shows your arguments really have no merit. > > Good luck with your new driver contribution! I look forward to reviewing > the code. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Jun 4, 2016, at 10:10 AM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> > wrote: > > > > I apologized else-thread about that one. It was a low blow. Anyway, to > > answer your question. The Cassandra community wins! How do we know if > they > > won't make you pay for the driver in the future (after all your code is > > written against it)? It has happened before. Also, the rest of the > > community can have a say in the direction (because that's the Apache > Way). > > The driver can be more intimate with the database, because it's the same > > people developing it. > > > >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:06 PM Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > >> An eloquent and powerful response, but please, reply to my points > instead > >> of resorting to ad hominem arguments. > >> > >> In practical terms, who would benefit from such a merge, and who is > >> suffering from the current state of affairs? > >> > >> -- > >> AY > >> > >> On 4 June 2016 at 18:03:05, James Carman (ja...@carmanconsulting.com) > >> wrote: > >> > >> "Sr. Software Engineer at DataStax", imagine that. > >> > >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:01 PM Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> As a member of that governing body (Cassandra PMC), I would much prefer > >>> not to deal with the drivers as well. > >>> > >>> And I’m just as certain that java-driver - and other driver > communities - > >>> would much rather prefer to keep their process and organisation instead > >> of > >>> being forced to conform to ours. > >>> > >>> I’m finding it hard to see a single party that would benefit from such > a > >>> merge, and who suffers from the current state of things. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> AY > >>> > >>> On 4 June 2016 at 17:46:48, James Carman (ja...@carmanconsulting.com) > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> How does it add more complexity by having one governing body (the PMC)? > >>> What I am suggesting is that the driver project be somewhat of a > >> subproject > >>> or a "module". It can still have its own life cycle, just like it does > >> now. > >>> > >>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 12:44 PM Nate McCall <n...@thelastpickle.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> It doesnt. But then we add complexity in communicating and managing > >>>> versions, releases, etc. to the project. Again, from my experience > with > >>>> hector, I just didnt want the hassle of owning that within the project > >>>> confines. > >>>> > >>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:30 AM, James Carman < > >>> ja...@carmanconsulting.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Who said the driver has to be released with the database? > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 12:29 PM Nate McCall <n...@thelastpickle.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 10:05 AM, James Carman < > >>>>> ja...@carmanconsulting.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> So why not just donate the Java driver and keep that in house? > >>>>> Cassandra > >>>>>> is > >>>>>>> a Java project. Makes sense to me. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> I won't deny there is an argument to be made here, but as a former > >>>> client > >>>>>> maintainer (Hector), current ASF committer (Usergrid) and active > >>>>> community > >>>>>> member since late 2009, my opinion is that this would be a step > >>>>> backwards. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Maintaining Hector independently allowed me the freedom to release > >>>> major > >>>>>> features with technology that I wanted to use while maintaining > >>>> backwards > >>>>>> compatibility without having to be bound to the project's release > >>> cycle > >>>>> and > >>>>>> process. (And to use a build system that didnt suck). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The initial concern of the use of the word "controls" is *super* > >> not > >>>> cool > >>>>>> and I hope that this is being fixed. That said, the reality, from > >> my > >>>>>> (external to DataStax) perspective, is that this is not the case. I > >>>> like > >>>>>> the current project separation the way it is and don't feel like > >>> there > >>>> is > >>>>>> any attempt at "control" of the java driver's direction and > >>>> development. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -Nate > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> ----------------- > >>>> Nate McCall > >>>> Austin, TX > >>>> @zznate > >>>> > >>>> CTO > >>>> Apache Cassandra Consulting > >>>> http://www.thelastpickle.com > >>>> > >>> > >> >
