cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan King <>
Subject Re: Data model names, reloaded
Date Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:50:15 GMT
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Jonathan Ellis<> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Toby DiPasquale<> wrote:
>> That feels to me to be a short-sighted point of view. I'd imagine that
>> its more important for people be able to understand the data model
>> than meeting some kind of arbitrary timeline. I, too, find the current
>> naming confusing and would love for this to be improved
> I'm going to have to call bullshit on the idea that this is about
> taking the time to get things right on the one hand and "meeting some
> kind of arbitrary timeline" on the other.
> Put that way, the choice is obvious!  Except of course that is not a
> fair representation of the tradeoffs.
> The release timeline isn't something arbitrary we pulled out of our
> asses.  0.3 has serious issues that 0.4 fixes, including but not
> limited to the API.  (The changelog was recently posted; I won't
> repeat it here.)  Having an updated, stable 0.4 out there will be far
> more valuable to the project than rearranging the deck chairs of
> terminology.  Cassandra is fundamentally a different model than the
> relational one everyone knows and loves.  That's the root of the
> problem with understanding Cassandra: the concepts.  The labels you
> attach to those, not so much.
> Again, we've been clear about the direction and the timeline for 0.4.
> This kind of proposal needed to happen a month ago.  It didn't.  That
> may be a shame, but that's how it works, and trying to hold up
> everyone else for your pet feature (without even patches! you'll
> pardon me if the implication seems to be that you expect others to do
> that part for you) is rude.  That's not how OSS should work.

We have never indicated that we expected others to do the work. I
actually have some patches for our first renaming suggestion already,
but given the massive size of the change, we though it prudent to
discuss it with others before investing the time in making the change.
I've set aside several days this week just to work on patches for


View raw message