I’ll second Billie’s proposal as it’s a good idea and something we should
pursue. Being as inclusive, open, and inviting as possible is a good thing!
Jeremy, thanks for a good strawman for a reasonable way to proceed with our
next steps.
-Chris
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 18, 2020,
Perhaps the following approach might make sense:
(1) Identify the changes that would need to be made.
(2) Understand the impact of those changes.
(3) Determine the right time in the roadmap to make the changes. Do we have
plans to revisit some of these components for other reasons so making a
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:40 AM Ed Coleman wrote:
>
> For processes, would Root be too confusing? We would then have rservers and
> tservers which may be more descriptive of functionality.
>
> This discussion is also going on the NiFi lists (and I assume elsewhere) One
> thing that popped out i
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:19 AM Joey Frazee
wrote:
>
> I think this is an important thing to do from the standpoint of being
> welcoming (this is in the current code of conduct btw).
That is my reason for supporting. When I ask myself, is this name
unwelcoming? I concluded that it likely is f
I think this is an important thing to do from the standpoint of being welcoming
(this is in the current code of conduct btw).
I’ve repeated this elsewhere but I was on a team 7 years ago where someone
asked us to stop using terminology including master and slave because it made
them uncomfortab
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:47 PM Kepner, Jeremy - LLSC - MITLL
wrote:
>
> Will it break user code?
I don't think the change has to break existing code, could use
deprecation for APIs. The properties could be automatically
translated with a warning logged or servers could refuse to start if
old pr
Nathan,
I'm sorry, but changing code semantics will not fix the human condition that's
responsible for racism. I wish it would, we need that solution. Is this a
step in the right direction, I doubt it. You're creating more angst that
you're solving.
On 6/18/20, 8:04 AM, "Nathaniel Freema
Robert
A short but sweet reply.
I've not been involved actively in this project for long, heck I haven't
really contributed more than a few fringe things in associating projects so
I'm sure your valuable contributions over the years have pushed the project
further than could of without your help.
I have been associated with the Accumulo project since its inception and many
other AF/LF projects for decades. I have collaborated with many of you since
the Bigtable paper came out and the NSA started the project which was release
to the OS community as Cloudbase. My early adoption and use o
For processes, would Root be too confusing? We would then have rservers and
tservers which may be more descriptive of functionality.
This discussion is also going on the NiFi lists (and I assume elsewhere) One
thing that popped out is that we may want to avoid leader / follower. (Leader
is pr
+1 to the ranked choice idea. I also think it makes sense to give GitHub and/or
ASF a little time to select a default/main branch name. It would be nice to
keep with the standard for the ecosystem since it appears GitHub is switching
away from master as a default branch name too.
There does app
11 matches
Mail list logo
