It doesnt. But then we add complexity in communicating and managing versions, releases, etc. to the project. Again, from my experience with hector, I just didnt want the hassle of owning that within the project confines.
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:30 AM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > Who said the driver has to be released with the database? > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 12:29 PM Nate McCall <n...@thelastpickle.com> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 10:05 AM, James Carman < > ja...@carmanconsulting.com> > > wrote: > > > > > So why not just donate the Java driver and keep that in house? > Cassandra > > is > > > a Java project. Makes sense to me. > > > > > > > > I won't deny there is an argument to be made here, but as a former client > > maintainer (Hector), current ASF committer (Usergrid) and active > community > > member since late 2009, my opinion is that this would be a step > backwards. > > > > Maintaining Hector independently allowed me the freedom to release major > > features with technology that I wanted to use while maintaining backwards > > compatibility without having to be bound to the project's release cycle > and > > process. (And to use a build system that didnt suck). > > > > The initial concern of the use of the word "controls" is *super* not cool > > and I hope that this is being fixed. That said, the reality, from my > > (external to DataStax) perspective, is that this is not the case. I like > > the current project separation the way it is and don't feel like there is > > any attempt at "control" of the java driver's direction and development. > > > > -Nate > > > -- ----------------- Nate McCall Austin, TX @zznate CTO Apache Cassandra Consulting http://www.thelastpickle.com
