[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Ian Holsman
So let me get this straight you want to hijack the project from the
original developers ,
so that you can run it at a larger scale in YOUR company ??
In a nutshell yes.
The original developers have not been present on the list for at least a
month, where they answered 1-2 questions.
The 'patches' and contribution area of the project has been little
better than dead since july. People have contributed patches, had them
integrated into the original source, only to have them disappear in the
next code that was 'thrown over' the wall from facebook. (one of the
core developers words not mine).
The last time we have seen any code on the project was in September. The
have promised something 'coming soon' which will have features facebook
thinks is important. This is without any real consultation done to the
others on the list about those features.
So overall I wouldn't call the project healthy, regardless of what the
original intentions were. I had approached Avinash, about this over the
last couple of months, where I heard that there was some internal issues
at facebook that had prevented them working on it. This is no 'bomb'
coming out of nowhere. They chose to ignore the message, and the natural
outcome of this.
I was approached by some other developers who were equally as frustrated
by this as I was. They had already forked the code and had started their
own development trees which had integrated the patches they wanted and
moved on with their own work.
I didn't like the direction I was seeing that heading (lots of people
working on their own) so I proposed we put this forth as a incubator
project so that the disparate developers can work on this together. They
agreed so I volunteered to write the proposal and get the thing working.
So these are the ethics that you have learnt after being associated
with many so called cool open source projects, why should anyone put
their blood and sweat into open source if scavengers like you are
circling the skies of open source.
very poetic.
I am doing this to save the technology from what I feel will be it's own
demise. you are free to call me a 'scavenger' if you wish, as I am
trying to take the best bits of a dead project and do something useful
with it.
We could have just grabbed the idea (or go back to the original dynamo
idea that it was built from) and started from scratch, would that be
better than reusing the hard work already done?
I don't bear any ill will towards the developers themselves, but to be
honest I think they are in between a rock and a hard place. I think they
would like to contribute more, but something inside their company is
holding them back, and maybe they don't have the full support of their
management. Maybe they can use this proposal to help them get more time
to devote to the project so a fork might not be necessary, maybe it will
stop facebook from contributing other projects in the future. I don't
know. But right now I'm interested in reviving this project.
At the moment this is just a proposal. The choice on whether the fork
will be accepted into incubation will be made by developers like
yourself, and they will use their own ethics and judgement on what is
best.
but to reiterate.
- no code in at least 3 months.
- patches from the community not accepted, or accepted and vanished in
the 'development' code branch
- decisions done behind closed doors, with little or no interaction with
the community
- little or no communication by the developers over the last month or two
- code and features being 'thrown' to the open source community.
These are my reasons for a fork.
Ian Holsman.
On Nov 15, 2:05 pm, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John Ryan wrote:
Here is a good suggestion from Jesse that Avinash forwarded to me.
Hi John.
Firstly the name change was done out of respect, and to make sure that
people don't get confused if/when the original cassandra becomes viable.
There was no intention to not to acknowledge the people and company that
originally donated the code. Have a look at the various graduated apache
projects for evidence of that.
Secondly if you guys think this proposal will work, go for it. But to
me, I don't see how this addresses any of the fundamental problems
occurring here.
The main thing you need (imho) for a successful open source project is
ownership by the community of all aspects of the project so that it can
survive companies pulling out when their needs change.
What is being proposed here is that another group (SCADS in this case)
takes control of the open source side of a project, with the promise
that they will merge the next code dump if it happens. In my eyes this
still puts the non-facebook people into a 2nd class citizen role. It
still has the core issue that there are 2 codebases, and major design
changes will happen behind closed doors, like they are currently
happening today. If/When Avinash/Prashant get a new manager, get a new
role in another group, they leave facebook, facebook gets bought, or
facebook goes under (they still aren't revenue positive) then we would
be without the only 2 people who know the system. I don't see this
changing with the proposal below.
and John on a personal note, I have no interest in having my name
associated with yet another cool technology. My name is associated with
way too many as it is. My main interest is to be able to use this at my
work (which would be at a scale larger than facebook's).
Regards
Ian
ps. I'm mailing the proposal in about 10m.. Your also welcome to voice
your concerns there as well.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Jesse Trutna* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
Date: Nov 15, 2008 5:24 AM
Subject: Cassandra Open Source Hullabaloo / Project Management Proposal
To: Avinash Lakshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>, Prashant Malik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
Blech, politics.
I've been following a bit of the hubbabaloo at the google-code site,
thought maybe I could offer a solution... Basically, it seems like
the main complaint is that there isn't enough interaction from you
guys, but you don't really have the time to be packaging things up all
the time for the community. At the same time, we on the SCADS team
would love to get more hands on the problem, which is something the
open-source community can provide. I can't speak for the whole team,
but in order not to lose that community I'd be willing to do the
community interaction - google code babysitting, if that'd make things
easier on you guys. I'd probably bring in some of the OSS guys, try
to build enough momentum around the project so that when the next big
code release comes out there's enough motivation to merge with the new
changes. I.e., let the community play around with this version, built
tools, etc until you guys are ready with the next one.
Or, if you guys want to maintain control of that repository, perhaps a
pseudo-sanctioned fork, a.k.a "Berkeley Cassandra" that gives credit
were credits is due. The existing site could point people to the
academic version until the next revision of the your work comes out.
At that point we'd either merge or have have two related main
branches, the Facebook version and the academic/oss version with
hopefully some productive cross-germination between them.
It just seems like what's going to happen is the community is going to
fork to a new project with a new name, which doesn't properly credit
you guys for all the hard work you've done or Facebook for releasing
it. Then, down the pipe, you'll release the next version and we'll
have two versions: One that's got momentum and has all the operational
burrs worked out (which is what the OSS community is good at) and the
version with a bunch of powerful, new features that works really well
(as long as your using it for Facebooks use cases on a similar
infrastructure.) i.e. broad and shallow vs narrow and deep.
Anyway, let me know what you think, hopefully things won't boil out of
control in the mean time. :)
Thanks,
Jesse Trutna
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cassandra
Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cassandra-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
