I would also love to see CCM as an official side project. It is important to the project and I personally use it regularly.
Jordan On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 7:55 AM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > We do still have the issues of DSE-supporting code in it, as we do with > the drivers. I doubt any of us strongly object to it: there's no trickery > happening here on the user; but we should be aware of it and have a rough > direction sketched out for when someone else comes along wanting to add > support for their proprietary product. > > IMO as long as it's documented well at the outset and we have plans to > slowly refactor to move it to clean boundaries (epic in JIRA anyone <3) so > it can be extracted into a separately maintained module by folks that need > it, I think we'd be in great shape. That'd also pave a path for others > wanting to add support for their proprietary products as well. Win-win. > > There's always this chicken or egg problem w/things like ccm. Do people > not contribute to it because it's out of the umbrella, or is it out of the > umbrella because people don't need to contribute to it? > > I hadn't thought about other subprojects relying on it. That's a very good > point. > > On Thu, May 16, 2024, at 4:48 AM, Jacek Lewandowski wrote: > > +1 (my personal opinion) > > How to deal with the DSE-supporting code is a separate discussion IMO > > - - -- --- ----- -------- ------------- > Jacek Lewandowski > > > czw., 16 maj 2024 o 10:21 Berenguer Blasi <berenguerbl...@gmail.com> > napisał(a): > > > +1 ccm is super useful > On 16/5/24 10:09, Mick Semb Wever wrote: > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2024 at 16:24, Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > > Right now ccm isn't formally a subproject of Cassandra or under governance > of the ASF. Given it's an integral components of our CI as well as for > local testing for many devs, and we now have more experience w/our muscle > on IP clearance and ingesting / absorbing subprojects where we can't track > down every single contributor to get an ICLA, seems like it might be worth > revisiting the topic of donation of ccm to Apache. > > For what it's worth, Sylvain originally and then DataStax after transfer > have both been incredible and receptive stewards of the projects and repos, > so this isn't about any response to any behavior on their part. > Structurally, however, it'd be better for the health of the project(s) > long-term to have ccm promoted in. As far as I know there was strong > receptivity to that donation in the past but the IP clearance was the > primary hurdle. > > Anyone have any thoughts for or against? > > https://github.com/riptano/ccm > > > > > We've been working on this along with the python-driver (just haven't > raised it yet). It is recognised, like the python-driver, as a key > dependency that would best be in the project. > > Obtaining the CLAs should be much easier, the contributors to ccm are less > diverse, being more the people we know already. > > We do still have the issues of DSE-supporting code in it, as we do with > the drivers. I doubt any of us strongly object to it: there's no trickery > happening here on the user; but we should be aware of it and have a rough > direction sketched out for when someone else comes along wanting to add > support for their proprietary product. We also don't want to be pushing > downstream users to be having to create their own forks either. > > Great to see general consensus (so far) in receiving it :) > > > >
