>> If you check the votes and the participation in discussion of PIPs it is *always* involving contributions of >3 different companies. >> Well, I think you've chosen *very* bad examples. In none of these cases the discussion I have selected these examples from the most recent discussions and they may not be the best examples to fully illustrate the point. However, there are several things to note with most of these examples that are still open PIPs and do not have closure after a couple of months. Also, you do not see non provider company reviews and VOTE in the majority of the discussion, which leads me to believe that you cannot move forward without relying on the provider’s mercy (same as Confluent).
>> > BTW, if your team is really tired of managing a stable Pulsar, StreamNative > can help you :) >> And so can DataStax ;-) I will take this as a conclusion to run a stable Pulsar release. On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 5:09 AM Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > On Mar 7, 2024, at 4:20 AM, Neng Lu <nl...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > BTW, if your team is really tired of managing a stable Pulsar, > StreamNative > > can help you :) > > And so can DataStax ;-)
