On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 10:45 AM Andrey Yegorov <andrey.yego...@datastax.com> wrote:
> My notes from the community meeting. Jerry, Matteo, and I talked about this > idea: > Thanks for the proposal and the notes, Andrey! I think a connector registry will be very useful as Pulsar adoption grows. * major problems are: > -- the process of adding new stuff (approval, review, quality > control/approval stuff) > This should be pretty lightweight, right? Brew has an approval process where the maintainers review your formula, but since Pulsar connectors are much more standardized that won't be necessary for us. The Pulsar connector repository's only role needs to be discovery, QA is the responsibility of the connector maintainer. > -- what to do with stuff that is not under apache umbrella (as in: code > ownership, not license). ASF possibly does not allow that > I think the PMC can set whatever policy it likes here -- it is only linking resources, not hosting binaries. Personally, I think it's better to be as comprehensive as possible. > -- conflict resolution with commercial entities pushing their competing > connectors > I recommend we simply decline to get involved in naming conflicts. (This is the formal policy of pypi <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0541/>, for instance, which also has a liberal "anyone can upload a package" stance.)
