On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Kelly Sommers <kell.somm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the community needs some clarification about what's going on. > There's a really concerning shift going on and the story about why is > really blurry. I've heard all kinds of wild claims about what's going on. > > I've heard people say the ASF is pushing DataStax out because they don't > like how much control they have over Cassandra. I've heard other people say > DataStax and the ASF aren't getting along. I've heard one person who has > pull with a friend in the ASF complained about a feature not getting > considered (who also didn't go down the correct path of proposing) kicked > and screamed and started the ball rolling for control change. > > I don't know what's going on, and I doubt the truth is in any of those, the > truth is probably somewhere in between. As a former Cassandra MVP and > builder of some of the larger Cassandra clusters in the last 3 years I'm > concerned. > > I've been really happy with Jonathan and DataStax's role in the Cassandra > community. I think they have done a great job at investing time and money > towards the good interest in the project. I think it is unavoidable a > single company bootstraps large projects like this into popularity. It's > those companies investments who give the ability to grow diversity in later > stages. The committer list in my opinion is the most diverse its ever been, > hasn't it? Apple is a big player now. > > I don't think reducing DataStax's role for the sake of diversity is smart. > You grow diversity by opening up new opportunities for others. Grow the > committer list perhaps. Mentor new people to join that list. You don't kick > someone to the curb and hope things improve. You add. > > I may be way off on what I'm seeing but there's not much to go by but > gossip (ahaha :P) and some ASF meeting notes and DataStax blog posts. > > August 17th 2016 ASF changed the Apache Cassandra chair > https://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/ > 2016/board_minutes_2016_08_17.txt > > "The Board expressed continuing concern that the PMC was not acting > independently and that one company had undue influence over the project." > > August 19th 2016 Jonothan Ellis steps down as chair > http://www.datastax.com/2016/08/a-look-back-a-look-forward > > November 2nd 2016 DataStax moves committers to DSE from Cassandra. > http://www.datastax.com/2016/11/serving-customers-serving-the-community > > I'm really concerned if indeed the ASF is trying to change control and > diversity of organizations by reducing DataStax's role. As I said earlier, > I've been really happy at the direction DataStax and Jonathan has taken the > project and I would much prefer see additional opportunities along side > theirs grow instead of subtracting. The ultimate question that's really > important is whether DataStax and Jonathan have been steering the project > in the right direction. If the answer is yes, then is there really anything > broken? Only if the answer is no should change happen, in my opinion. > > Can someone at the ASF please clarify what is going on? The ASF meeting > notes are very concerning. > > Thank you for listening, > Kelly Sommers > Kelly, Thank you for taking the time to mention this. I want to react to this statement: "I've heard people say the ASF is pushing DataStax out because they don't like how much control they have over Cassandra. I've heard other people say DataStax and the ASF aren't getting along. I've heard one person who has pull with a friend in the ASF complained about a feature not getting considered (who also didn't go down the correct path of proposing) kicked and screamed and started the ball rolling for control change." There is an important saying in the ASF: https://community.apache.org/newbiefaq.html - If it didn't happen on a mailing list, it didn't happen. It is natural that communication happens outside of Jira. The rough aim of this mandate is a conversation like that that happens by the water cooler should be summarized and moved into a forum where it can be recorded and discussed. There is a danger in repeating something anecdotal or 'things you have heard'. If that party is being suppressed, that is an issue to deal with. If a party is unwilling to speak for themselves publicly in the ASF public forums that is on them. Retelling what others told us is 'gossip' as you put it. "I think it is unavoidable a single company bootstraps large projects like this into popularity" "I don't think reducing DataStax's role for the sake of diversity is smart." Let me state my opinion as an open source ASF member that was never directly payed to work on an open source project. I have proposed and seen proposed by others ideas to several open source projects inside (ASF and outside) which were rejected. Later (months maybe years later) the exact idea or roughly the same idea is implemented by different person in a slightly different form. There is a lot of grey area there. How does that related to this http://www.datastax.com/2016/ 11/serving-customers-serving-the-community ? Remember the ASF is a volunteer organization. One desired effect of the volunteerism is so that one single large company does not bootstrap or control the project. (When my proposed ideas got knocked down, I had some choices including complain to anyone that will listen, lick my wounds and press on, or become less involved.) Whatever event has happened has happened. Like you, I only know of it second hand so I will not comment. The volunteer committers can decide their own level of involvement. For example, they can "double down" and use their free time to stay involved. They can attempt to convince their organization that pulling them back is the wrong move, or they can fall away. " The ultimate question that's really important is whether DataStax and Jonathan have been steering the project in the right direction" Outside of the politics/litigation it is becoming normal for an ASF project to rotate the PMC chair. It keeps things fresh, and helps avoid issues where some may perceive control by one person/entity. Your question may ultimately highlight an issue as ASF sees it, namely who is "steering" you mention a corporate entity in your question.
