 PMC
failed to police copyright issues (including with Datastax marketing
materials), mostly because they did not know this was their duty (and
partially, in at least the case of some individuals, because they did not have
any desire to participate in this duty on a volunteer basis).

They were also seen to have poorly nurtured other involvement from the wider
community.

To some greater or lesser extent these charges were valid, and the community
(not just the board, at least on the non-trademark issues) felt improvements
would be welcome. But certain members of the board behaved in what _appeared_
to be a very hostile and childish manner, by threatening Datastax with removal
of every employee from the project. (I've been in heated arguments with these
individuals for their behaviour, and I'll note they disavow any intended
hostility, though do not disavow their actions)

The ASF did _not_ remove Datastax from anything, although they were I think
involved in Jonathan Ellis (Datastax CTO) being replaced as chair.

Datastax recently posted that they were planning to put much of their new
feature development into their commercial version. They claim this all had
nothing to do with stepping back from the project, but in all likelihood this
is a "rising above it" PR position. That said, it probably is a good business
decision, and may have happened sooner or later anyway.

~~~
SOLAR_FIELDS
Reading this apparently biased article in favor of DataStax, it seems like no
one is coming out of this situation looking good. I personally believe that
DataStax may have overplayed their hand here since several of the high-powered
Silicon Valley companies use Cassandra. If DS' commercial offerings aren't up
to snuff, one of them will undoubtedly step in to help steer development of
the source in a direction that benefits them.

Cassandra is one of the better big datastore offerings out there, and the doom
and gloom narrative played by the article seems a bit disingenuous to say the
least.

~~~
_benedict
I honestly don't see how c