Thanks to the all contributions that already came in. I made some more additions and hope to turn this into a PR to the site soon.
Uwe On Fri, Sep 20, 2019, at 10:46 AM, Micah Kornfield wrote: > I think this is a good idea, as well. I added comments and additions on > the document. > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 11:47 AM Neal Richardson < > neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Uwe, I think this is an excellent idea. I've started > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cgN7mYzH30URDTaioHsCP2d80wKKHDNs9f5s7vdb2mA/edit?usp=sharing > > to collect some ideas and notes. Once we have gathered our thoughts > > there, we can put them in the appropriate places. > > > > I think that some of the result will go into the FAQ, some into > > documentation (maybe more "how-to" and "getting started" guides in the > > respective language docs, as well as some "how to share Arrow data > > from X to Y"), and other things that we haven't yet done should go > > into a sort of Roadmap document on the main website. We have some very > > outdated content related to a roadmap on the confluence wiki that > > should be folded in as appropriate too. > > > > Neal > > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:26 AM Uwe L. Korn <m...@uwekorn.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > there has been a lot of public discussions lately with some mentions of > > actually informed, valid critique of things in the Arrow project. From my > > perspective, these things include "there is not STL-native C++ Arrow API", > > "the base build requires too much dependencies", "the pyarrow package is > > really huge and you cannot select single components". These are things we > > cannot tackle at the moment due to the lack of contributors to the project. > > But we can use this as a basis to point people that critique the project on > > this that this is not intentional but a lack of resources as well as it > > provides another point of entry for new contributors looking for work. > > > > > > Thus I would like to start a document (possibly on the website) where we > > list the major critiques on Arrow, mention our long-term solution to that > > and what JIRAs need to be done for that. > > > > > > Would that be something others would also see as valuable? > > > > > > There has also been a lot of uninformed criticism, I think that can be > > best combat by documentation, blog posts and public appearances at > > conferences and is not covered by this proposal. > > > > > > Uwe > > >
