+1. I would suggest you address the comments first? I went through the open ones and most of them make sense to me (and left few additional comments).
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 12:42 PM Andrew Lamb <andrewlam...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 11:40 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, > > I agree with this sentiment, I asked on the PR if there would be another > > pass and then I can merge it. > > > > Cheers, > > Micah > > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 3:20 AM Andrew Lamb <andrewlam...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello Parquet Devs, > > > > > > I propose we merge the first (admittedly bare bones) "Implementation > > > Status" page PR [1] to the website soon. I think this page is vital to > > the > > > Parquet community (and to any attempt to extend the format) so the > sooner > > > the better. > > > > > > The reason to merge the PR now is to have a base from which to build. > > That > > > PR is already over a year old and has so many comments it is hard to > > follow > > > or know what the path forward is. If we insist on sorting all the > details > > > out before we merge it I fear it will never merge. > > > > > > Once we have a page, I think the next steps are to add a preamble > > > explaining what it is for and to start trying to fill out the chart for > > an > > > implementation (I am happy to try for parquet-rs). I suspect during > that > > > process we will have to adjust some of the charts more. > > > > > > Thank you for your consideration (and thank you for all the comments so > > > far) > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/34 > > > > > >
