Update all the things #97
Conversation
…reflection code, also upgrade JUnit 5 to the latest
| Thanks for the contribution! Before we can merge this, we need @dkichler to sign the Salesforce Inc. Contributor License Agreement. |
| @Crim Any chance you have bandwidth for this? |
| @Crim if you don't have bandwidth to look at this, I wonder if you know any other contacts @ Salesforce who might be able to help reboot this library? |
| I did not test every version of Kafka exhaustively, but the suites passed against Kafka 2.6.1, 3.4.0, 3.6.0 and 3.8.0 |
| Hi Dave, Hopefully this reply is coming through via my email reply -- Unfortunately because of how Salesforce has configured my user account, I no longer have access to this project. I'll reach back out to Salesforce's open source/github team again and see if we can come up with a solution to get me access again, though I had little luck last time. Apologies, Stephen …On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 5:50 AM Dave Kichler ***@***.***> wrote: @Crim <https://github.com/Crim> Any chance you have bandwidth for this? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#97 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAELSBIXTUBCKS3LAZSO2QDZWNFX3AVCNFSM6AAAAABOGBVGTKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGNJQGEZTQNZUGU> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***> |
| @Crim No worries, I suspected as much. I appreciate the effort on your end. I thought about reaching out to the Salesforce OSS team as well, perhaps between us we can get some movement here. |
| It seems Salesforce has no real interest in maintaining this library and are looking for a shepherd to take it over. I'm investigating what it might take to have my organization take the baton. |
| Hey Dave, Replying via Email still... Honestly/Unfortunately I think that is likely the best plan. Stephen …On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 11:31 PM Dave Kichler ***@***.***> wrote: It seems Salesforce has no real interest in maintaining this library and are looking for a shepherd to take it over. I'm investigating what it might take to have my organization take the baton. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#97 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAELSBLKUZTN4B3MTLMD7SLZYAQ5FAVCNFSM6AAAAABOGBVGTKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGNRYGQ3DINRVHE> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***> |
| Hi @Crim. I have everything lined up to take ownership/maintainer status of this library under my current organization, but am now bumping into the license, which is current BSD-style and attributed directly to Salesforce. I've been in contact with Salesforce OSS about relicensing under something more generic and permissive, mostly likely Apache License 2.0, but I wanted to also ask your permission directly as the primary contributor. Would you take any issue with such a relicense? |
| Hi Dave, I cannot speak for Salesforce as a whole so you'll need to get confirmation from the appropriate Salesforce OSS team. That said, for me and only me personally, I have absolutely no problem with that. Thanks! …On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 10:33 PM Dave Kichler ***@***.***> wrote: Hi @Crim <https://github.com/Crim>. I have everything lined up to take ownership/maintainer status of this library under my current organization, but am now bumping into the license, which is current BSD-style and attributed directly to Salesforce. I've been in contact with Salesforce OSS about relicensing under something more generic and permissive, mostly likely Apache License 2.0 <https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt>, but I wanted to also ask your permission directly as the primary contributor. Would you take any issue with such a relicense? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#97 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAELSBOAUZTILUZLB5O3V7TZ3UKRTAVCNFSM6AAAAABOGBVGTKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIMJTHEZTCOJQGM> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***> |
2 participants
Updates pretty much everything:
Addresses #96
Addresses #81
Addresses #58 (sort of, jumps 17 in favour of 21)