I will try to review tomorrow and cast a vote.

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 5:41 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There is only 1 binding +1 vote so far, we should probably wait for
> three before closing the vote (it's possible that lazy consensus could
> be employed here but not much harm in waiting a few more days)
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:15 PM Francois Saint-Jacques
> <fsaintjacq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 9:08 PM Fan Liya <liya.fa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 11:52 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:29 PM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah, you're right, it's PR 6040:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6040
> > > > >
> > > > > Similarly, the C++ implementation is at PR 6026:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6026
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Antoine.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le 11/02/2020 à 23:17, Wes McKinney a écrit :
> > > > > > hi Antoine, PR 5442 seems to no longer be the right one. Which
> open PR
> > > > > > contains the specification now?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 1:06 PM Antoine Pitrou <
> anto...@python.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Hello,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> We have been discussing the creation of a minimalist C-based
> data
> > > > > >> interface for applications to exchange Arrow columnar data
> structures
> > > > > >> with each other. Some notable features of this interface
> include:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> * A small amount of header-only C code can be copied
> independently
> > > > into
> > > > > >> third-party libraries and downstream applications, no
> dependencies are
> > > > > >> needed even on Arrow C++ itself (notably, it is not required to
> use
> > > > > >> Flatbuffers, though there are trade-offs resulting from this).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> * Low development investment (in other words: limited-scope use
> cases
> > > > > >> can be accomplished with little code), so as to enable C or C++
> > > > > >> libraries to export Arrow columnar data with minimal code.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> * Data lifetime management hooks so as to properly handle
> non-trivial
> > > > > >> data sharing (for example passing Arrow columnar data to an
> async
> > > > > >> processing consumer).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> This "C Data Interface" serves different use cases from the
> > > > > >> language-independent IPC protocol and trades away a number of
> features
> > > > > >> in the interest of minimalism / simplicity. It is not a
> replacement
> > > > for
> > > > > >> the IPC protocol and will only be used to interchange
> in-process data
> > > > at
> > > > > >> C or C++ call sites.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The PR providing the specification is here:
> > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5442
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> In particular, you can read the spec document here:
> > > > > >>
> > > >
> https://github.com/pitrou/arrow/blob/doc-c-data-interface2/docs/source/format/CDataInterface.rst
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> A fairly comprehensive C++ implementation of this demonstrating
> its
> > > > > >> use is found here:
> > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5608
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> (note that other applications implementing the interface may
> choose to
> > > > > >> only support a few features and thus have far less code to
> write)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Please vote to adopt the SPECIFICATION (GitHub PR #5442).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [ ] +1 Adopt C Data Interface specification
> > > > > >> [ ] +0
> > > > > >> [ ] -1 Do not adopt because...
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thank you
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Regards
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Antoine.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> (PS: yes, this is in large part a copy/paste of Wes's previous
> vote
> > > > > >> email :-))
> > > >
>

Reply via email to