Re: [VOTE] Cassandra Enhancement Proposal (CEP) documentation

+1 On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 11:56 AM Scott Andreas wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Unfortunately not; ASF recorded the keynotes but video/streaming > facilities weren't available for the individual tracks. > > A copy of the slides are uploaded here: > > https://github.com/ngcc/ngcc2019/blob/master/Commit

Re: Offering some project management services

We discussed about the video call on the dev list and everyone agreed to it. I also welcome Josh in helping with the project. Like Josh and Dinesh mentioned, let’s encourage contributions by allowing non-committers to do first round of review as I don’t see a downside of doing this. These video

Re: Offering some project management services

Here is the mail thread where we discussed this. It also has agreement that we will discuss things on mailing list and no decision till it happens on mailing list. Hope this clears things up when you read the thread. https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa54420a43671c00392978f2b0920bc6926ca9ba1e61

Re: Offering some project management services

proposal will be endorsed. But > you have to do it, because that's how the decision is made. I'm not sure why > this is controversial - you all know this is true, I'm certain of it. > > People keep forgetting. I'm just going to sit here and keep reminding you, > s

Re: Offering some project management services

#x27;s still not clear, there's no point flogging a dead horse. > > > On 11/01/2020, 17:50, "Sankalp Kohli" wrote: > >The Agenda is public and everyone will contribute to it. Anyone can attend > the meeting. Anyone can propose an alternate time. How is

Re: server side describe

+1 on holding off and focus on shipping 4.0 On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:25 PM Joshua McKenzie wrote: > This looks like a feature that'd potentially invalidate some testing that's > been done and we've been feature frozen for over a year and a half. Also: > scope creep. > > My PoV is we hold off. I

Re: server side describe

Whether a feature is fully done and whether it validates or invalidate testing is not the point here. The point is that it is a feature and violates feature freeze. If someone brings in a feature which is almost done and does not invalidate testing then will we merge all of them to 4.0? Lot of feat

Re: Simplify voting rules for in-jvm-dtest-api releases

+1 On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 8:32 AM Yifan Cai wrote: > +1 > > > From: Sam Tunnicliffe > Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 7:49:50 AM > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > Subject: Re: Simplify voting rules for in-jvm-dtest-api releases > > +1 > > > On 15 Apr 2020, at 1

Re: server side describe

What are the next steps? Do we hold a vote as I see few initial emails which dont seem to agree and have not replied based on future discussions. On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 12:50 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote: > +1 let's keep moving forward. > > Dinesh > > > On Apr 9, 2020, at 4:07 PM, Nate McCall wrote:

Re: Keeping test-only changes out of CHANGES.txt

Can we vote(if required) on this as it looks largely everyone is in agreement? Also we can pile on documentation changes in the vote unless anyone objects. On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 2:52 PM Erick Ramirez wrote: > > > > In a conversation with Mick we discussed keeping doc changes out as well. > > A

Re: Keeping test-only changes out of CHANGES.txt

Thanks On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:32 AM Mick Semb Wever wrote: > > Can we vote(if required) on this as it looks largely everyone is in > > agreement? > > > I knew I forgot to post a reply here, thanks for the nudge sankalp, my bad. > > I took the above thread as consensus and last Friday committ

Re: Discussion: addition to CEP guide

+1 On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 6:07 AM Andrés de la Peña wrote: > +1 (nb) > > On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 13:09, Aleksey Yeshchenko > > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > On 23 Apr 2020, at 12:58, Benjamin Lerer > > wrote: > > > > > > +1 for both > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 3:49 AM Jordan We

List of serious issues fixed in 3.0.x

Hi, I want to share some of the serious issues that were found and fixed in 3.0.x. I have created this list from JIRA to help us identify areas for validating 4.0. This will also give an insight to the dev community. Let us know if anyone has suggestions on how to better use this data in vali

Re: [VOTE] Project governance wiki doc (take 2)

+1 On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 8:37 AM Jake Luciani wrote: > +1 (b) > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:59 AM Joshua McKenzie > wrote: > > > A reminder: this vote will close at midnight PST today in roughly 17 > hours. > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 2:20 PM J. D. Jordan > > wrote: > > > > > +1 non-

Re: [DISCUSS] Future of MVs

Hi, I think we should revisit all features which require a lot more work to make them work. Here is how I think we should do for each one of them 1. Identify such features and some details of why they are deprecation candidates. 2. Ask the dev list if anyone is willing to work on improving the

Re: [DISCUSS] Future of MVs

I see this discussion as several decisions which can be made in small increments. 1. In release cycles, when can we propose a feature to be deprecated or marked experimental. Ideally a new feature should come out experimental if required but we have several who are candidates now. We can work on i

Re: [DISCUSS] A point of view on Testing Cassandra

Can you please allow comments on the doc so we can leave feedback. On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 2:16 PM Joshua McKenzie wrote: > Link: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ktuBWpD2NLurB9PUvmbwGgrXsgnyU58koOseZAfaFBQ/edit# > > > Myself and a few other contributors are working with this point of vie

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.0-beta1 (take2)

+1 On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 10:58 AM Blake Eggleston wrote: > +1 > > > On Jul 20, 2020, at 9:56 AM, Jon Haddad wrote: > > > > +1, thanks Mick for rerolling. > > > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 6:42 AM Joshua McKenzie > > wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 8:51 AM Jake Luciani wro

Re: Contributing research on C* usage for blog

+1 to the blog post On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 10:53 AM Jeff Jirsa wrote: > I don't have any questions, but datastax folks: thanks for funding stuff > like this. > > (I'd love to see it as a blog post, I'd also love to see people internalize > the negative feedback and assumed features and determin

Re: [VOTE] Accept the Harry donation

+1 On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:07 AM Ekaterina Dimitrova wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 12:52, Dinesh Joshi wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Dinesh > > > > > > > > > On Sep 16, 2020, at 9:30 AM, Joshua McKenzie > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

Hi Brandon, In all respect, we need to discuss and vote before we create a new branch. So it is best if we do that instead of creating branches. Freeze is a symptom not a cause so if we dont like the symptom, we should see how to fix the cause. Are we fine having a database releas

Re: Creating a branch for 5.0 …?

s, Sankalp On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:50 AM Brandon Williams wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:22 PM sankalp kohli > wrote: > > > > Hi Brandon, > > In all respect, we need to discuss and vote before we > > create a new branch. So it i

Re: Welcome Jordan West, David Capwell, Zhao Yang and Ekaterina Dimitrova as Cassandra committers

Congratulations everyone. On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:53 AM Lorina Poland wrote: > I'm really excited to see these four folks become committers! > Congratulations! > > Lorina Poland > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:16 AM Paulo Motta > wrote: > > > Great news, congratulations to the new committ

Re: Welcome Yifan Cai as Cassandra committer

Congratulations Yifan. On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 9:10 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > The PMC's members are pleased to announce that Yifan Cai has accepted the > invitation to become committer last Friday. > > Thanks a lot, Yifan, for everything you have done! > > Congratulations and welcome > > The

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.0.17

+1 for "Assertion error in RangeTombstoneList.diff" On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Jake Luciani wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.0.17. > > > > sha1: 3aff44915edbd2bf07955d5b30fd47bf9c4698da > > Git

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.13

+1 for CASSANDRA-10887 On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Gary Dusbabek wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Jake Luciani wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.1.13. > > > > sha1: d5b6d1b634f69709d2b3caa17

Re: Jira down, again?

Michael KJ...Jira is down again :P On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Michael Shuler wrote: > On 06/20/2016 01:16 PM, Will Hayworth wrote: > > Hey all--I didn't want to add more heat than light to this, but I think > at > > this point I'm behooved to speak up. :) I'm a developer at Atlassian (the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.15

+1 for CASSANDRA-12043 and CASSANDRA-11991 On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Dave Brosius wrote: > nits > > snappy-java and thrift-server's license files have the wrong version > number

State of Unit tests (1 out of 100 passes in trunk)

Hi All, I can see that unit tests are very flaky in trunk as well as previous versions of Cassandra. Out of the last 100 builds(#949 to #1049) for trunk, I only saw 1 successful build. Is there any plan to fix the failing tests that I am not aware of? I see lots of tickets recently for f

Re: State of Unit tests (1 out of 100 passes in trunk)

elp speed up the process (and get to know > parts of the code-base you don't yet know!), please let me know and I'll > start kicking out test fix tickets your way once triaged. > > Thanks. > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:08 PM, sankalp kohli > wrote: > > > H

Re: Reminder: critical fixes only in 2.1

+1 on only allowing critical bug fixes. I agree with Sylvain that CASSANDRA-11349 is a border line critical bug. I would vote for CASSANDRA-11349 as being critical since over streaming is a big issue for us as well. I am also fine taking it as an internal patch since we already maintain an interna

Re: A proposal to move away from Jira-centric development

+1 We should do this for large contributions. Also we should link the dev discussion thread in the JIRA for reference. On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Jeremiah D Jordan < jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> wrote: > I like keeping things in JIRA because then everything is in one place, and > it is easy

Re: Thanks for all the fish.

Cannot agree more on this. Huge +1 On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Brian O'Neill wrote: > +1, props to the giant on whose shoulders we stand. > -- > Brian O'Neill > Principal Architect @ Monetate > m: 215.588.6024 > bone...@monetate.com > Is desktop dead? Find out

Guidelines for test coverage

Hi, I wanted to know if there are any guidelines for contributors to give out unit and integration tests along with the patches. If not, we should discuss and have them in place. I know we are making good progress with test coverage but we should add guidelines around adding unit and integrati

Re: Guidelines for test coverage

My takeaway from recent in-person discussions the other week about this > > topic, is that it's really just a matter of making this less of a > > chore/sharing the burden of reviews when the whole dtest suite has to be > > run. > > > > Thanks for bringing this up, thoug

Re: [Discuss] Adding dtest to project

I think we should continue to use Dtest. Besides the improvement which Edward talked about, we should see how we can have an option in ccm to also support multiple machines if available. On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Edward Capriolo wrote: > I love DTest I think it is a great thing in the too

Re: [VOTE] Accept dtests Donation Into Project

+1 On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Jake Farrell wrote: > +1 > > -Jake > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > > > I propose we begin the process of accepting the contribution of the > > dtest codebase (https://github.com/riptano/cassandra-dtest) into the > > project. > > > >

Backports to 2.1.16

Hi, We backport a lot of patches in Cassandra at Apple. We contribute all the patches to the community and port them to 2.1 if we think they will help. We will soon start focusing on 3.0 and won't back port to 2.1 unless critical. I want to list them in this email in random order and not base

Re: Backports to 2.1.16

We dont plan to open them at this time considering 2.1 is pretty old. On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Romain Hardouin < romainh...@yahoo.fr.invalid> wrote: > Interesting, will you publish the backports on https://github.com/apple ? > > > > Thanks, > > Romain >

Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0

List looks really good. I will let you know if there is something else we plan to add to this list. On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > It was brought up recently at the PMC level that our goals as a > project are not terribly clear. > > This is a pretty good point as outside of

Re: [VOTE] Close client-...@cassandra.apache.org mailing list

+1 On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Brandon Williams wrote: > As the moderator of this list, +1. It was more helpful in the thrift days > (where I built a client, and thus became the moderator) but is practically > useless in the cql world. > > On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 11:11 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.10 (Take 3)

+1 On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Brandon Williams wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.10. > > > > sha1: d6a3ef4863142c3f9fc1def911f28341fc78f2e8 > > Git: > > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/as

Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0

@Jeff "But since you asked, I have ONE tick/tock (3.9) cluster being qualified for production because it needs SASI." You are brave :) On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > > We’ll be voting in the very near future on timing of major releases and > release strategy. 4.0 won’t hap

Re: Summary of 4.0 Large Features/Breaking Changes (Was: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

Hi Nate, Most of the JIRAs in the middle are being rebased or being reviewed and code is already out there. These will make 4.0 a very solid release. Thanks, Sankalp On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Ben Bromhead wrote: > We are happy to start testing against completed features. Ide

Re: Summary of 4.0 Large Features/Breaking Changes (Was: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

I have asked him to calm down as these things are never constructive for the community. Making personal comments put him in bad light more than anytime else. I will speak with him in person when we are in office. Thanks for keeping an eye on these things for us. I will setup another meeting wi

Re: Summary of 4.0 Large Features/Breaking Changes (Was: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

This was not for the Dev list :) > On Nov 20, 2016, at 09:06, Sankalp Kohli wrote: > > I have asked him to calm down as these things are never constructive for the > community. Making personal comments put him in bad light more than anytime > else. > I will speak with him

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.10 (Take 3)

Hi, I see the following test runs are failing. Are they for this release? http://cassci.datastax.com/job/cassandra-3.X_utest_cdc/ http://cassci.datastax.com/job/cassandra-3.X_testall/ http://cassci.datastax.com/job/cassandra-3.X_offheap_dtest/ http://cassci.datastax.com/job/cassandra-3.X_novno

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.10 (Take 3)

be fixed by > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12651 > > Although there can be more tests in PA. > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 10:35 PM sankalp kohli > wrote: > >> Hi, >>I see the following test runs are failing. Are they for this re

Re: Status of dtest donation?

Is CCM which is used by Dtest part of this process? > On Nov 21, 2016, at 06:56, Jake Luciani wrote: > > I think the main blocker is identifying and contacting the folks who have > contributed code to dtest without an ICLA > >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Dave Lester wrote: >> >> I may

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.10 (Take 3)

another thread for making Dtest a blocker for release. -1 due to testall failing. 1. http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator- cassandra-dev/201607.mbox/%3cCAEPxca1TGo6S1O8DcpM7dmXsBe4 4EniSezkpq5_=qksctk3...@mail.gmail.com%3e On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Sankalp Kohli wrote: >

Failed Dtest will block cutting releases

Hi, We should not cut a releases if Dtest are not passing. I won't block 3.10 on this since we are just discussing this. Please provide feedback on this. Thanks, Sankalp

Re: Where do I find EverywhereStrategy?

If we think that having this strategy can be misused, we can always have a check to allow this only on Auth keyspace. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Brandon Williams wrote: > Relevant: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12912 > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote

Re: Where do I find EverywhereStrategy?

The point Ben is saying is that for auth keyspace, default o​f RF=1 is not good for any type of cluster whether it is small or large.

Re: Failed Dtest will block cutting releases

r more active and widespread community > involvement if we want to truly *fix* this problem long-term. > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Jonathan Haddad > wrote: > > > +1. Kind of silly to put advise people to put something in prod which is > > known to be broken in

Re: Collecting slow queries

This is duped by a JIRA which is fixed in 3.2 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6226 On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Jan wrote: > HI Folks; > is there a way for 'Collecting slow queries' in the Apache Cassandra. ?I > am aware of the DSE product offering such an option, but need

Re: Per blockng release on dtest

I think we should start with blocking 3.10 releases on testall + Dtest. After 3.10, we can start blocking it on other jobs for each release after that. This will make sure we make progress and dont cause 3.10 to sit for a long time. Thoughts? On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Josh McKenzie wrote:

Re: Wrapping up tick-tock

+1 to 6 month release and ending tick/tock On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Nate McCall wrote: > > > > If this question is to outside the topic and more appropriate for a > > different thread I'm happy to put a hold on it until the release cadence > is > > agreed. > > > > Let's please do put thi

Re: Wrapping up tick-tock

+ to Jason idea. We should have a minimum of 6 months between a major version. On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Jason Brown wrote: > It's fine to limit the minimum time between major releases to six months, > but I do not think we should force a major just because n months have > passed. I thin

Re: Perf regression between 2.2.5 and 3.11

We are just getting started with 3.0.10. Will let you know. On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > There was CASSANDRA-12269 fixed in 3.10 recently as well. > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Dikang Gu wrote: > > We still see perf regression with the otc_coalescing_strategy d

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.11

+1 On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 5:48 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > +1 > > -- > AY > > On 16 February 2017 at 01:15:46, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) > wrote: > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.11. > > sha1: 338226e042a22242645ab54a372c7c1459e78a01 > Git: > http://git-

Re: [VOTE] Ask Infra to move github notification emails to pr@

+1 On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:26 PM, jason zhao yang < zhaoyangsingap...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 at 9:36 AM, Jonathan Haddad wrote: > > > +1 > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:33 PM Jason Brown > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 18:21 Anthony Grasso > > > > wrot

Re: [DISCUSS] Implementing code quality principles, and rules (was: Code quality, principles and rules)

If the code coverage goes down or do not go above the required cutoff due to adding toString or getter setter like functionality, can we make it a process to explain the reason in the JIRA before committing it? Regarding changes in hard to unit tests parts of the code, can we make it a process to

Re: [VOTE] self-assignment of jira tickets

+1 > On Mar 29, 2017, at 07:50, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: > > +1 > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Benjamin Lerer > wrote: > >> Non binding +1 >> >> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Jonathan Haddad >> wrote: >> >>> Non binding +1 On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:22 AM Jeff Jirsa wrote:

Re: Cassandra on RocksDB experiment result

We should definitely evaluate pluggable storage engine...Besides several other advantages, it also helps in adding lot of tests to the storage engine. On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jon Haddad wrote: > I have no clue what it would take to accomplish a pluggable storage > engine, but I love th

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.14

+1 On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Jason Brown wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 14:12 Brandon Williams wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Michael Shuler > > wrote: > > > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.14. > > > > > > sha1: f3e38cb638113c2

Re: Proposal to retroactively mark materialized views experimental

+1 to marking it experimental and also making it a prop to enable these features. By default I think they should be disabled. On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > Reviewers should be able to suggest when experimental is warranted, and > conversation on dev+jira to justify when i

Re: Repair scheduling tools

Repair is critical for running C* and I agree with Roopa that it needs to be part of the offering. I think we should make it easy for new users to run C*. Can we have a side car process which we can add to Apache Cassandra offering and we can put this repair their? I am also fine putting it in C*

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

We can take a look on 1st June how things are then decide if we want to freeze it and whats in and whats out. On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ariel Weisberg wrote: > Hi, > > +1 to having a feature freeze date. June 1st is earlier than I would have > picked. > > Ariel > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018, at

Re: [Discuss] patch review virtual hackathon

I think it better to pick some JIRAs per 2-3 weeks and have people review them. In my experience, it is hard to synchronize all people across companies during one 72 hour slot. On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > Per Kurt's point in our release thread, we have a lot to do here

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

Hi, I am +1 on freezing features at some point. Here are my thoughts 1. The reason it took 1.5 years b/w 3.0 and 4.0 is because 3.0 was released(not cut) too early. There were so many critical bugs in it for months after the release. Most people have just finished or about to upgrade to 3.0. (

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

I think moving it to August/Sept will be better On Apr 10, 2018, at 17:24, Josh McKenzie wrote: >> >> 50'ish days is too short to draw a line in the sand, >> especially as people balance work obligations with Cassandra feature >> development. > > What's a reasonable alternative / compromise f

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

Also in this time we should try to see who can do 3 things I mentioned in my earlier email > On Apr 10, 2018, at 17:50, Sankalp Kohli wrote: > > I think moving it to August/Sept will be better > > On Apr 10, 2018, at 17:24, Josh McKenzie wrote: > >>> >>&

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

If we have to decide on the date, we need to get confirmation on the following which I mentioned earlier. We dont want to freeze things and no one to make progress on 1. Who can sign up for fixing the tests(including upgrade tests). I don't think we can release without tests passing. We can still

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

We can fix test after freezing if there are resources people are willing to put. We need to gather support to see who can help with the 3 points I have mentioned and when. On Apr 12, 2018, at 02:13, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: >> >> I agree there's little point freezing if we can't even test the

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

Also I am +1 freezing anytime even today if someone can show what the plan is post freeze. May be I should start another thread to gather support for these items > On Apr 12, 2018, at 02:21, Sankalp Kohli wrote: > > We can fix test after freezing if there are resources people are w

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

freeze with these inputs. I agree your point that with more features it will be harder to test but may be without those features no one will test it. Just my opinion :) > On Apr 12, 2018, at 02:37, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:21 AM Sankalp Kohli > wro

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

+1 with Sept 1st as I am seeing willingness for people to test it after it > On Apr 12, 2018, at 13:59, Ben Bromhead wrote: > > While I would prefer earlier, if Sept 1 gets better buy-in and we can have > broader commitment to testing. I'm super happy with that. As Nate said, > having a solid li

Re: Evolving the client protocol

Do we have driver authors who wish to support both projects? On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 9:25 AM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > Removed other lists (please don't cross post) > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > Hello Cassandra developers, > > > > > > We're starting to see clie

Re: Proposal: freeze Thrift starting with 2.1.0

RIP Thrift :) +1 with "We will retain it for backwards compatibility". Hopefully most people will move out of thrift by 2.1 On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Brandon Williams wrote: > As someone who has written a thrift wrapper, +1 > > > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Jonathan Ellis > wrote

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.0.9

Can we include these JIRAs in 2.0.9. The patch is available and the changes are very small. Unfinished or inflight CAS are always done at QUORUM CAS contention back off time should be configurable

Re: [VOTE] CEP-15: General Purpose Transactions

+1 to all On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 11:57 AM C. Scott Andreas wrote: > 1. +1nb > 2. +1nb > 3. +1nb > > It’s been encouraging to follow discussion advancing potential > enhancements to this proposal on the other threads. > > I disagree that it is a good outcome for the project and the Apache > Cass

<    1   2