Thank you. It's published to Apache ORC website. :) On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 1:44 AM Quanlong Huang <huangquanl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation! It makes sense to me. Please count my +1. > > BTW, I just create a PR to mention Impala in the adopters page: > https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/1106 > > Thanks, > Quanlong > > On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 8:15 AM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.h...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Thank you for your feedback, Quanlong! :) > > > > > However, 4 months seems like a pretty long testing time. > > > > Yes, you may feel that way. It depends on the project. :) > > > > When I started Apache ORC 1.7 preparation, I cut `branch-1.7` on June > 27th, > > 2021. Preparing Apache ORC 1.7.0 took almost 3 months and it was released > > on September 15th, 2021. > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/5rxmqb4g0rlt0yj2kx9tx6q8z19bozr3 > > (FYI: Apache ORC branches) > > > > At this time, the test scope of Apache ORC 1.8.0 has been increased > because > > we added PyArrow/Dask support officially (although it's mostly dependent > on > > the Apache Arrow layer.) > > > > > Do we have any plans for the tests? > > > Impala currently uses a snapshot version of ORC. > > > > At every release, Apache ORC community is trying to revisit and help most > > registered downstreams. As you know, it is not easy. As of today, some > > projects are behind and some projects like Trino are not tested by us at > > all. > > > > https://orc.apache.org/docs/adopters.html > > > > If you add Impala to this page and help with the verification, it would > be > > great at this time. > > > > Lastly, if you have any new feature, you can still backport it. Since > > the Apache ORC PMC won't block you, don't worry about that. :) > > > > Dongjoon. > > > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 1:34 AM Quanlong Huang <huangquanl...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 for the feature freeze plan. > > > > > > However, 4 months seems like a pretty long testing time. Do we have > > > any plans for the tests? Impala currently uses a snapshot version of > > > ORC. But it can only cover the C++ client part. I'm not sure if there > > > are any other projects using snapshot versions of ORC. So they can > > > also improve our test coverage. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Quanlong > > > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 3:49 AM Dongjoon Hyun <dongj...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Thank you, William > > > > > > > > Dongjoon. > > > > > > > > On 2022/04/29 22:56:15 "William H." wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > It sounds good to me! > > > > > > > > > > Bests, > > > > > William > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 3:10 PM Dongjoon Hyun < > dongjoon.h...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, All. > > > > > > > > > > > > Apache ORC 1.8 is planned on September 15th and the milestone is > > > here. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/orc/milestone/2 (3 Open, 105 > Closed) > > > > > > > > > > > > To give sufficient testing time (4 months), I'd like to propose > to > > > start a > > > > > > soft feature freeze by creating `branch-1.8`. > > > > > > > > > > > > After cutting branches, > > > > > > > > > > > > - `main` branch will target Apache ORC 1.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > - All new commits on the `main` branch are supposed to be > shipped at > > > Apache > > > > > > ORC 1.9.0 by default. > > > > > > > > > > > > - The ORC committers still can do manual backporting if needed > > > (because > > > > > > this is a soft-cut) > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think about the above plan? > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Dongjoon. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
