Yes. We should use apache/arrow's GitHub Releases. In <CAD1RbrpKs4bGWFExkafW5JK_=d6qpjf4u514t2qplffoqcy...@mail.gmail.com> "Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposal for incremental point releases of the MATLAB interface" on Fri, 10 Nov 2023 19:11:16 +0100, Raúl Cumplido <rau...@apache.org> wrote:
> In case it was not clear, even though the binary job is run on > ursacomputing/crossbow when we upload the binaries and create the > Release that should be, at least in my opinion, an apache/arrow > release. > > Both for the steps: > 1. RC: Upload MLTBX to GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z-rcN > and > 2.2 Upload it to GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z > > El vie, 10 nov 2023 a las 19:02, Raúl Cumplido (<rau...@apache.org>) escribió: >> >> Hi Sara, >> >> El vie, 10 nov 2023 a las 18:48, Sarah Gilmore >> (<sgilm...@mathworks.com.invalid>) escribió: >> > >> > Hi Kou, >> > >> > > We can use apache/arrow's GitHub Releases. The release >> > > distribution document says that we can use GitHub as a >> > > release platform: >> > > https://infra.apache.org/release-distribution.html#other-platforms >> > > >> > > apache/arrow doesn't use GitHub Releases yet but >> > > apache/arrow-adbc and apache/arrow-flight-sql-postgresql >> > > already use GitHub Releases. (We just use "gh release >> > > upload" to upload our artifacts to GitHub Releases.) >> > >> > Thank you for clarifying that we can use apache/arrow's GitHub Releases >> > area for hosting the MLTBX file. We assumed we couldn't use the main >> > repository, but it's great to hear we can! >> > >> > > BTW, how does File Exchange "Connecting to GitHub Repositories"? >> > > https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/content/fx/about.html#Why_GitHub >> > > >> > > Does it just use "polling"? Or do we need to install any >> > > GitHub App, set secret variable or something on >> > > apache/arrow? If the latter, we need to ask INFRA to do it. >> > >> > We are currently consulting with the development team responsible for the >> > GitHub <-> File Exchange integration. We'll send a followup email with a >> > concrete answer once we know more. >> > >> > > If we use GitHub Releases on apache/arrow, we can use the >> > > following workflow. We don't need to use JFrog. >> > > >> > > 1. RC: Upload MLTBX to GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z-rcN >> > > 2. Release: Run a post release script that would: >> > > 2.1 Download MLTBX from GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z-rcN >> > > 2.2 Upload it to GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z >> > > 2.3 Linked File Exchange entry will be automatically updated >> > >> > This seems like a much more streamlined approach. Not having to upload to >> > JFrog will make things easier. Thanks for the suggestion! >> > >> > To clarify, in step 1, would we upload the MLTBX to >> > ursacomputing/crossbow's GitHub Releases area [1]? Or, would we upload to >> > apache/arrow's GitHub Releases area? If we upload release candidates to >> > apache/arrow's GitHub Releases area, they would get automatically linked >> > to the File Exchange. Ideally, we wouldn't want users to download release >> > candidates. >> > >> >> Currently all the binaries are generated on the third step of the >> Release process [1] when we run `03-binary-submit.sh`. The crossbow >> job could build the MLTBX artifact and then when we do download the >> other binaries (`04-binary-download.sh`) we should also download the >> MTLBX and when we submit the rest to jfrog (`05-binary-upload.sh`) we >> could Upload MLTBX to GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z-rcN. >> >> Once the release is approved and we do the post-release tasks to >> "officially" release, we would download the MLTBX and upload to the >> new GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z this can be done as another >> step on our post-release tasks (post-xx-matlab.sh) >> >> [1] >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/developers/release.html#build-source-and-binaries-and-submit-them >> >> > > We can use GitHub Releases as I said. But if we use GitHub >> > > Releases, the release notes on GitHub Releases may include >> > > not only the MATLAB interface but also all >> > > implementations. It may not be useful for this use case. >> > > >> > > FYI: The R bindings have their release notes under >> > > https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/ . See >> > > https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/news/ . >> > >> > We think it would still be useful to link to the GitHub release notes from >> > the File Exchange entry even if it includes notes for all language >> > bindings. The File Exchange <-> GitHub integration just includes a link to >> > the GitHub release notes under the Version History tab. If we find having >> > a more focused version of the release notes would be useful, then we can >> > create a markdown file analogous to the NEWS.md for the R bindings as you >> > suggested (thanks or pointing this out). >> > >> > [1] https://github.com/ursacomputing/crossbow/releases >> > >> > Thanks for all your help! >> > >> > Best, >> > >> > Sarah Gilmore >> > ________________________________ >> > From: Sutou Kouhei <k...@clear-code.com> >> > Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2023 7:50 PM >> > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org> >> > Cc: Sarah Gilmore <sgilm...@mathworks.com>; Lei Hou <lei...@mathworks.com> >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposal for incremental point releases of >> > the MATLAB interface >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > > One open question about this approach: which GitHub >> > > repository should we use for hosting the MLTBX via GitHub >> > > Releases? >> > > >> > > We don't think using the main apache/arrow GitHub Releases >> > > area is the right approach. So, would it make sense to >> > > create a separate "bridge" repository just for hosting the >> > > latest MLTBX files? Should this be an ASF associated >> > > repository like apache/arrow-matlab or would a MathWorks >> > > associated repository like mathworks/arrow-matlab be OK? >> > > We aren't sure what makes the most sense here, but welcome >> > > any suggestions. >> > >> > We can use apache/arrow's GitHub Releases. The release >> > distribution document says that we can use GitHub as a >> > release platform: >> > https://infra.apache.org/release-distribution.html#other-platforms<https://infra.apache.org/release-distribution.html#other-platforms> >> > >> > apache/arrow doesn't use GitHub Releases yet but >> > apache/arrow-adbc and apache/arrow-flight-sql-postgresql >> > already use GitHub Releases. (We just use "gh release >> > upload" to upload our artifacts to GitHub Releases.) >> > >> > BTW, how does File Exchange "Connecting to GitHub Repositories"? >> > https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/content/fx/about.html#Why_GitHub >> > >> > Does it just use "polling"? Or do we need to install any >> > GitHub App, set secret variable or something on >> > apache/arrow? If the latter, we need to ask INFRA to do it. >> > >> > If we use GitHub Releases on apache/arrow, we can use the >> > following workflow. We don't need to use JFrog. >> > >> > 1. RC: Upload MLTBX to GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z-rcN >> > 2. Release: Run a post release script that would: >> > 2.1 Download MLTBX from GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z-rcN >> > 2.2 Upload it to GitHub Releases for apache-arrow-X.Y.Z >> > 2.3 Linked File Exchange entry will be automatically updated >> > >> > >> > > File Exchange entries have a "Version History" which >> > > includes release notes from the "backing" GitHub Releases >> > > area. So, this would probably be a sensible location to >> > > put the release notes. >> > >> > We can use GitHub Releases as I said. But if we use GitHub >> > Releases, the release notes on GitHub Releases may include >> > not only the MATLAB interface but also all >> > implementations. It may not be useful for this use case. >> > >> > FYI: The R bindings have their release notes under >> > https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r> . See >> > https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/news/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/news> >> > . >> > >> > > Also, including MATLAB updates in >> > > Apache Arrow release blog posts >> > > (e.g. >> > > https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2023/11/01/14.0.0-release/<https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2023/11/01/14.0.0-release>) >> > > may also be helpful. >> > >> > Yes. We should do it. :-) >> > >> > >> > Thanks, >> > -- >> > kou >> > >> > In >> > <mn2pr05mb6496df713e917c66e30ab50cae...@mn2pr05mb6496.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> >> > "Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposal for incremental point releases of the >> > MATLAB interface" on Wed, 8 Nov 2023 20:44:10 +0000, >> > Kevin Gurney <kgur...@mathworks.com.INVALID> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Kou and Dewey, >> > > >> > > Thank you very much for your very thorough and detailed responses to all >> > > of our questions. This is extremely valuable feedback and the points >> > > that you made make alot of sense. >> > > >> > > Sarah and I talked this over a bit more and we think that sticking with >> > > the overall apache/arrow project release cycle (i.e. stay in line with >> > > 15.0.0) makes the most sense in the long term. >> > > >> > > @Dewey - thanks very much for highlighting the pros and cons of creating >> > > a separate repository. We also really appreciate the community being >> > > willing to try and support our development needs. That being said, we >> > > think it is probably best to stay in-model with the main apache/arrow >> > > release process for the time being rather than creating a separate >> > > repository for the MATLAB interface. >> > > >> > > To address some related points and questions: >> > > >> > >> Can we just mention "This is not stable yet!!!" in the documentation >> > >> instead of using isolated version? >> > > >> > > Yes. This is good point and we already have a disclaimer in the >> > > README.md [1] for the MATLAB interface which says: "Warning The MATLAB >> > > interface is under active development and should be considered >> > > experimental." >> > > >> > >> It's better that we use CI for this like other binary packages such as >> > >> .deb/.rpm/.wheel/.jar/... >> > > >> > > This makes sense and we agree. We will follow up with PRs to add the >> > > necessary MATLAB packaging scripts and CI workflow files. >> > > >> > >> Does the MLTBX file include Apache Arrow C++ binaries too like >> > >> .wheel/.jar? >> > > >> > > Yes. The MLTBX file will package the Apache Arrow C++ binaries, similar >> > > to the Java JARs / Python wheels. >> > > >> > >> MATLAB doesn't provide the official package repository such as PyPI for >> > >> Python and https://rubygems.org/<https://rubygems.org> for Ruby, right? >> > > >> > > The equivalent to pypi.org or rubygems.org for MATLAB would be the >> > > MathWorks File Exchange [2]. >> > > >> > >> If the official package repository for MATLAB doesn't exist, JFrog is >> > >> better because the MLTBX file will be large (Apache Arrow C++ binaries >> > >> are large). >> > > >> > > As noted above, the "official package repository" for MATLAB would be >> > > the MathWorks File Exchange. File Exchange has tight integration with >> > > GitHub [3]. When a new release is available in GitHub Releases, the >> > > associated File Exchange entry will be automatically updated. >> > > >> > > We believe we could leverage this integration between File Exchange and >> > > GitHub Releases to automate the MATLAB interface release process. This >> > > approach might look like: >> > > >> > > 1. Upload MLTBX to JFrog Artifactory >> > > 2. Run a post release script that would: >> > > 2.1 Download MLTBX from JFrog Artifactory >> > > 2.2 Upload to GitHub Releases (e.g. apache/arrow-matlab - see discussion >> > > below) >> > > 2.3 Linked File Exchange entry will be automatically updated >> > > >> > > One open question about this approach: which GitHub repository should we >> > > use for hosting the MLTBX via GitHub Releases? >> > > >> > > We don't think using the main apache/arrow GitHub Releases area is the >> > > right approach. So, would it make sense to create a separate "bridge" >> > > repository just for hosting the latest MLTBX files? Should this be an >> > > ASF associated repository like apache/arrow-matlab or would a MathWorks >> > > associated repository like mathworks/arrow-matlab be OK? We aren't sure >> > > what makes the most sense here, but welcome any suggestions. >> > > >> > >> We may want to use the status page for it: >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/status.html<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/status.html> >> > > >> > > Thanks for highlighting this. This makes sense, and we can follow up >> > > with a PR to add MATLAB to the status page. >> > > >> > >> How about creating >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/matlab/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/matlab> >> > >> ? We can use Sphinx like the Python docs >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/python/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/python> >> > >> or another documentation tools like the R docs >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/> . If >> > >> we use Sphinx, we can create >> > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/docs/source/matlab/<https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/docs/source/matlab> >> > > >> > > This makes sense and eventually we want to have comprehensive >> > > documentation in line with other language bindings using Sphinx. In >> > > addition to comprehensive documentation, we were also hoping that we >> > > could host release notes in a place that is easily accessible from the >> > > MLTBX download location. File Exchange entries have a "Version History" >> > > which includes release notes from the "backing" GitHub Releases area. >> > > So, this would probably be a sensible location to put the release notes. >> > > Also, including MATLAB updates in Apache Arrow release blog posts (e.g. >> > > https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2023/11/01/14.0.0-release/<https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2023/11/01/14.0.0-release/>) >> > > may also be helpful. >> > > >> > > -- >> > > >> > > We really appreciate all of the community's guidance on navigating the >> > > release process! >> > > >> > > We will get started on integrating with the existing release tooling. >> > > >> > > [1] >> > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/matlab#status<https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/matlab#status> >> > > [2] https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange >> > > [3] >> > > https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/content/fx/about.html#Why_GitHub >> > > >> > > Best Regards, >> > > >> > > Kevin Gurney >> > > ________________________________ >> > > From: Dewey Dunnington <de...@voltrondata.com.INVALID> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2023 8:53 PM >> > > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org> >> > > Cc: Sarah Gilmore <sgilm...@mathworks.com>; Lei Hou >> > > <lei...@mathworks.com> >> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposal for incremental point releases >> > > of the MATLAB interface >> > > >> > > For argument's sake, I might suggest that the process you described in >> > > your initial note would probably work best in another repo: you would >> > > be able to iterate faster and release/version at your own pace. The >> > > flexibility you get from moving to a separate repo comes at the cost >> > > of extra responsibility: you have to set up your own CI, manage your >> > > own issues, and set up your own release verification scripts + release >> > > votes on the mailing list. Because you bind Arrow C++, you would have >> > > to take sufficient steps to ensure that the Arrow C++ developers are >> > > made aware of changes that break the Matlab bindings and vice versa >> > > (i.e., test against dev Arrow C++ in a CI job). >> > > >> > > Setting up that infrastructure for apache/arrow-nanoarrow took ~a week >> > > of development time, and it now takes ~half a day to release a new >> > > version (it took more for the first few versions, and the matlab >> > > version has considerably higher complexity). Probably the biggest >> > > barrier to releasing from another repo is that you have to ensure a >> > > critical mass of PMC members can/will run your release verification >> > > script and vote. >> > > >> > > I happen to feel that it's the PMC's/wider community's responsibility >> > > to help language binding contributors adopt a workflow that suits >> > > their needs. If active Matlab contributors agree that they want to >> > > release version 0.1 from another repo, (I feel that) we're here to >> > > help you do that. If the active contributors want to stay in >> > > apache/arrow, there is less flexibility about what you release and >> > > when; however, the release process is well-defined. >> > > >> > > On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 8:43 PM Sutou Kouhei <k...@clear-code.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Hi, >> > >> >> > >> > As a point of reference, we noticed that PyArrow is on >> > >> > version 14.0.0, but it feels "misleading" to say that the >> > >> > MATLAB interface is at version 14.0.0 when we haven't yet >> > >> > implemented or stabilized all core Arrow APIs. >> > >> >> > >> I can understand this but I suggest that we use the same >> > >> version as other packages in apache/arrow. Because: >> > >> >> > >> * Using isolated version increases release complexity. >> > >> * Using isolated version may introduce another >> > >> "misleading"/"confusion": For example, "the MATLAB >> > >> interface 1.0.0 uses Apache Arrow C++ 20.0.0" may be >> > >> misleading/confused: >> > >> * The MATLAB interface 1.0.0 doesn't use Apache Arrow C++ >> > >> 1.0.0. >> > >> * It may be difficult to find the corresponding >> > >> Apache Arrow C++ version from the MATLAB interface >> > >> version. >> > >> >> > >> Can we just mention "This is not stable yet!!!" in the >> > >> documentation instead of using isolated version? >> > >> >> > >> We may want to use the status page for it: >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/status.html<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/status.html><https://arrow.apache.org/docs/status.html<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/status.html>> >> > >> >> > >> > 1. Manually build the MATLAB interface on Windows, macOS, and Linux >> > >> >> > >> It's better that we use CI for this like other binary >> > >> packages such as .deb/.rpm/.wheel/.jar/... >> > >> >> > >> If we release the MATLAB interface separately, which Apache >> > >> Arrow C++ version is used? If we release the MATALB >> > >> interface right now, is Apache Arrow C++ 14.0.0 (the latest >> > >> release) used or is Apache Arrow C++ main (not released yet) >> > >> used? The MATLAB interface on main will depend on Apache >> > >> Arrow C++ main, we may not be able to use the latest release >> > >> for the MATLAB interface on main. >> > >> >> > >> > 2. Combine all of the cross platform build artifacts into >> > >> > a single MLTBX file [1] for distribution >> > >> >> > >> Does the MLTBX file include Apache Arrow C++ binaries too >> > >> like .wheel/.jar? >> > >> >> > >> > 3. Host the MLTBX somewhere that is easliy accessible for download >> > >> >> > >> MATLAB doesn't provide the official package repository such >> > >> as PyPI for Python and >> > >> https://rubygems.org/<https://rubygems.org/><https://rubygems.org<https://rubygems.org>> >> > >> for Ruby, right? >> > >> >> > >> > 1. Is there a recommended location where we can host the MLTBX file? >> > >> > e.g. GitHub Releases [2], JFrog [3], etc.? >> > >> >> > >> If the official package repository for MATLAB doesn't exist, >> > >> JFrog is better because the MLTBX file will be large (Apache >> > >> Arrow C++ binaries are large). >> > >> >> > >> > 2. Is there a recommended location for hosting release notes? >> > >> >> > >> How about creating >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/matlab/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/matlab/><https://arrow.apache.org/docs/matlab<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/matlab>> >> > >> ? >> > >> We can use Sphinx like the Python docs >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/python/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/python/><https://arrow.apache.org/docs/python<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/python>> >> > >> or another >> > >> documentation tools like the R docs >> > >> https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/><https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r<https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r>> >> > >> . >> > >> If we use Sphinx, we can create >> > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/docs/source/matlab/<https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/docs/source/matlab/><https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/docs/source/matlab<https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/docs/source/matlab>> >> > >> . >> > >> >> > >> > 3. Is there a recommended cadence for incremental point releases? >> > >> >> > >> I suggest avoiding separated release as above. >> > >> >> > >> > 4. Are there any notable ASF procedures [4] [5] (e.g. voting on a new >> > >> > release proposal) that we should be aware of as we consider creating >> > >> > an initial release? >> > >> >> > >> We don't need additional task for an initial release. >> > >> >> > >> > 5. How should the Arrow project release (i.e. 14.0.0) >> > >> > relate to the MATLAB interface version (i.e. 0.1)? As a >> > >> > point of reference, we noticed that PyArrow is on >> > >> > version 14.0.0, but it feels "misleading" to say that >> > >> > the MATLAB interface is at version 14.0.0 when we >> > >> > haven't yet implemented or stabilized all core Arrow >> > >> > APIs. Is there any precedent for using independent >> > >> > release versions for language bindings which are not >> > >> > fully stabilized and are also part of the main >> > >> > apache/arrow repository? >> > >> >> > >> We don't have any precedent for using independent release >> > >> versions for language bindings. All language bindings used >> > >> the same version. >> > >> >> > >> Apache Arrow JavaScript isn't a language bindings but it >> > >> used separated release and isolated versions before >> > >> 0.4.1. It joined apache/arrow release after 0.4.1. (The next >> > >> version of Apache Arrow JavaScript 0.4.1 is 13.0.0.) >> > >> >> > >> > We've noticed that Arrow-related projects which are not >> > >> > part of the main apache/arrow GitHub repository >> > >> > (e.g. DataFusion) follow a mailing list-based voting and >> > >> > release process. However, it's not clear whether it makes >> > >> > sense to follow this process for the MATLAB interface >> > >> > since it is part of the main apache/arrow repository. >> > >> >> > >> If we want to use separated release for the MATLAB >> > >> interface, we should follow the same release process as >> > >> apache/arrow and other apache/arrow-* because it's the >> > >> standard ASF release process. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> Thanks, >> > >> -- >> > >> kou >> > >> >> > >> In >> > >> <mn2pr05mb649619998eae9579cceba692ae...@mn2pr05mb6496.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> >> > >> "[DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposal for incremental point releases of the >> > >> MATLAB interface" on Tue, 7 Nov 2023 20:31:31 +0000, >> > >> Kevin Gurney <kgur...@mathworks.com.INVALID> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > Hi All, >> > >> > >> > >> > A considerable amount of new functionality has been added to the >> > >> > MATLAB interface over the last few months. We appreciate all the >> > >> > community's support in making this possible and are happy to see all >> > >> > the progress that is being made. >> > >> > >> > >> > At this point, we would like to create an initial "0.1" release of >> > >> > the MATLAB interface. Incremental point releases will enable MATLAB >> > >> > users to provide early feedback. In addition, learning how to >> > >> > navigate the release process is an important step towards eventually >> > >> > releasing a stable 1.0 version of the MATLAB interface. >> > >> > >> > >> > Our proposed approach to creating an initial release would be to: >> > >> > >> > >> > 1. Manually build the MATLAB interface on Windows, macOS, and Linux >> > >> > 2. Combine all of the cross platform build artifacts into a single >> > >> > MLTBX file [1] for distribution >> > >> > 3. Host the MLTBX somewhere that is easliy accessible for download >> > >> > >> > >> > For reference - MLTBX is a standard packaging format for MATLAB which >> > >> > enables simple "one-click" installation - analogous to a Python pip >> > >> > package or a Ruby gem. >> > >> > >> > >> > Creating an MLTBX file manually should be relatively low effort. >> > >> > However, in the long term, we would love to enable semi-automated >> > >> > "push button" releases via GitHub Actions (and possibly even "nightly >> > >> > builds"). >> > >> > >> > >> > Since this is our first time creating a release of the MATLAB >> > >> > interface, we wanted to draw on the community's expertise to answer a >> > >> > few questions: >> > >> > >> > >> > 1. Is there a recommended location where we can host the MLTBX file? >> > >> > e.g. GitHub Releases [2], JFrog [3], etc.? >> > >> > 2. Is there a recommended location for hosting release notes? >> > >> > 3. Is there a recommended cadence for incremental point releases? >> > >> > 4. Are there any notable ASF procedures [4] [5] (e.g. voting on a new >> > >> > release proposal) that we should be aware of as we consider creating >> > >> > an initial release? >> > >> > 5. How should the Arrow project release (i.e. 14.0.0) relate to the >> > >> > MATLAB interface version (i.e. 0.1)? As a point of reference, we >> > >> > noticed that PyArrow is on version 14.0.0, but it feels "misleading" >> > >> > to say that the MATLAB interface is at version 14.0.0 when we haven't >> > >> > yet implemented or stabilized all core Arrow APIs. Is there any >> > >> > precedent for using independent release versions for language >> > >> > bindings which are not fully stabilized and are also part of the main >> > >> > apache/arrow repository? >> > >> > >> > >> > We've noticed that Arrow-related projects which are not part of the >> > >> > main apache/arrow GitHub repository (e.g. DataFusion) follow a >> > >> > mailing list-based voting and release process. However, it's not >> > >> > clear whether it makes sense to follow this process for the MATLAB >> > >> > interface since it is part of the main apache/arrow repository. >> > >> > >> > >> > We sincerely appreciate the community's help and guidance on this >> > >> > topic! >> > >> > >> > >> > Please let us know if you have any questions. >> > >> > >> > >> > [1] >> > >> > https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/creating-help.html?s_tid=CRUX_lftnav >> > >> > [2] >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/releases<https://github.com/apache/arrow/releases><https://github.com/apache/arrow/releases<https://github.com/apache/arrow/releases>> >> > >> > [3] >> > >> > https://apache.jfrog.io/ui/native/arrow/<https://apache.jfrog.io/ui/native/arrow><https://apache.jfrog.io/ui/native/arrow<https://apache.jfrog.io/ui/native/arrow>> >> > >> > [4] >> > >> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html<https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html><https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html<https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>> >> > >> > [5] >> > >> > https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval<https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval><https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval<https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval>> >> > >> > >> > >> > Best Regards, >> > >> > >> > >> > Kevin Gurney
