Boo hoo. Todd said it wasn't about control, and then a few days later said he was forcing people into doing reviews. So yeah: in his case, it *is* about control.
Over the 17 years I've been around Apache, every single time I've seen somebody attempt to justify something like RTC, it always goes back to control. Always. -g On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have to completely disagree and find your assertion vaguely offensive. > > > On Nov 25, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > > wrote: > >> ... > >> > >> and inherited the RTC ethic from our parent community. I did recently > test > >> the state of consensus on RTC vs CTR there and it still holds. I think > this > >> model makes sense for HBase, which is a mature (read: complex) code base > >> that implements a distributed database. For sure we want multiple sets > of > >> > > > > I call bullshit. "complex" my ass. I've said it before: all software is > > complex, and yours is no more complex than another. That is NOT a > rationale > > for installing RTC. It is an excuse for maintaining undue control. > > > > -g > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
