Brian Houser proposed to build a tool for the next release to validate the level of CQL compatibility. With it we could simply organize the offers by level of CQL compatibility.
Le mer. 23 juin 2021 à 10:24, bened...@apache.org <pub...@belliottsmith.com> a écrit : > If we are going to include copycats, let’s (in all seriousness) at least > be fun about it and put them under the heading “Copycats” > > We should also include a disclaimer that they may not be feature > compatible. Since due diligence on this is hard even for subject matter > experts, it would be nicer still if we put a bit of detail explaining some > of the differences before putting them on the website, but I doubt anyone > has the time for that (so I still slightly prefer we don’t include them). > > > ________________________________ > From: Ben Bromhead <b...@instaclustr.com> > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2021 4:56:34 AM > To: Cassandra DEV <dev@cassandra.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Additions to Cassandra ecosystem page? > > There is certainly a lack of clarity in the grouping, as a number of those > services are not offering Apache Cassandra. I would suggest another > category along the lines of "Cassandra Protocol compatible offerings". > > That way users can easily distinguish between ecosystem offerings where > "the driver works, but certain features might not", vs an actual Apache > Cassandra offering. > > We could then also add things like Yugabyte and Scylla into that category. > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 11:15 AM Jonathan Koppenhofer <j...@koppedomain.com > > > wrote: > > > No major opinion on the "cloud offerings" piece, but I agree people > should > > know what they are getting into, and be able to make an informed > decision. > > However, if someone is going down that path, I would hope they do the > > due-diligence to make sure it fits their requirements. > > > > 1 small update I would suggest. It seems like Datastax Spring Boot entry > > would go in development frameworks as opposed to the sidecar section. > > > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021, 5:39 PM bened...@apache.org <bened...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Under Cloud Offerings, are we comfortable implicitly endorsing “API > > > compatible” offerings that aren’t actually Cassandra, and also don’t > (as > > > far as I am aware) fully support Cassandra functionality? Should we at > > > least mention that this is the case? > > > > > > > > > From: Melissa Logan <meli...@constantia.io> > > > Date: Tuesday, 22 June 2021 at 21:39 > > > To: u...@cassandra.apache.org <u...@cassandra.apache.org>, > > > dev@cassandra.apache.org <dev@cassandra.apache.org> > > > Subject: Additions to Cassandra ecosystem page? > > > Hi all, > > > > > > The Cassandra community recently updated its website and has added > > several > > > new entries to the Ecosystem page: > > https://cassandra.apache.org/ecosystem/ > > > . > > > > > > If you have edits or know of other third-party Cassandra projects, > tools, > > > products, etc that may be useful to others -- please get in touch and > > we'll > > > add to the next round of site updates in July. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Melissa > > > Apache Cassandra Contributor > > > > > > > > -- > > Ben Bromhead > > Instaclustr | www.instaclustr.com<http://www.instaclustr.com> | > @instaclustr > <http://twitter.com/instaclustr> | +64 27 383 8975 >
