Hi,

How about just checking out apache/arrow in GitHub Actions
because this is a temporary problem until the next Apache
Arrow release?

We can checkout apache/arrow-adbc and apache/arrow by the
following steps:

  - uses: actions/checkout@v3
  - uses: actions/checkout@v3
    with:
      repository: apache/arrow
      path: csharp/arrow

Developers can checkout out apache/arrow or create a
symbolic link from existing apache/arrow checkout manually
if they need.

Thanks,
-- 
kou

In 
 
<bl0pr2101mb0964bcbb8834d682abb623ccf8...@bl0pr2101mb0964.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
  "ADBC -> Arrow references for C#" on Tue, 23 May 2023 15:02:24 +0000,
  David Coe <david....@microsoft.com.INVALID> wrote:

> We recently put up feat(csharp): adding C# functionality by davidhcoe * Pull 
> Request #697 * apache/arrow-adbc 
> (github.com)<https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/pull/697>. This PR 
> introduces C# functionality for ADBC and is dependent on capabilities 
> introduced in GH-33856: [C#] Implement C Data Interface for C# by 
> CurtHagenlocher * Pull Request #35496 * apache/arrow 
> (github.com)<https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/35496>, which has now been 
> merged to main.
> 
> We currently use the submodule approach for ADBC to reference Arrow. This 
> submodule was pointed at
> 
> [submodule "arrow"]
>               path = arrow
>               url = https://github.com/CurtHagenlocher/arrow
>               branch = CSharp_CAPI
> 
> until the PR was merged. Since this has now landed, we can clean up the 
> references a bit, but wanted to get some thoughts on the best way to do so. 
> Here are some proposed options, in order of preference and ease of use:
> 
> 1. An Apache.Arrow 13.0.0-alpha release is published to nuget
> 2. Release an interim nuget package called something like 
> Temp.Apache.Arrow.CData so it can be referenced from within the ADBC project
> 3. Update the submodule to point to the main repo. Add instructions for how 
> to pull this submodule.
> 
> Any thoughts on the best way to do these and potential timeframes?
> 
> 
>   *   David

Reply via email to