As far as I know, most steps require committer privileges including github write access, svn write access, maven deploy permission, etc.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 10:37 PM Aihua Xu <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, Gang, for helping out for these releases. > Question: I was playing with release process and seems only committers can > push to the repository. Can the contributors get the permission? > > > > > On Aug 25, 2025, at 12:58 AM, Fokko Driesprong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Go for it :) > > > > Op ma 25 aug 2025 om 09:40 schreef Gang Wu <[email protected]>: > > > >> Sounds good! I can also help with these two releases. > >> > >> Let me start the format release unless someone beats me :) > >> > >> Best, > >> Gang > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 3:28 PM Fokko Driesprong <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> I agree with Gábor. Yesterday, a PR has been merged > >>> < > >>> > >> > https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/commits/dac5a35040ab57000b84246746c5c9cb25267261/src/main/thrift > >>>> > >>> that also touches the Thrift file. I think the release should be > >>> pretty straightforward, and I'm happy to help out with both releases. > >>> > >>> Kind regards, > >>> Fokko > >>> > >>> Op ma 25 aug 2025 om 09:00 schreef Gábor Szádovszky <[email protected] > >: > >>> > >>>> I think it would be cleaner to have a parquet-format release with the > >>>> finalized spec first. Referencing it in the parquet-java release would > >>>> state clearly that it is (supposed to) working according to the > >> finalized > >>>> specification. > >>>> > >>>> Gabor > >>>> > >>>> Gang Wu <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2025. aug. 25., H, > >> 4:48): > >>>> > >>>>> The vote [1] for finalizing variant spec has passed so it's time to > >>>> revive > >>>>> this discussion. > >>>>> > >>>>> I just checked all the commits [2] to parquet-format since the last > >>>> release > >>>>> and found > >>>>> that there is no thrift definition change. All commits are about > >>>>> clarification or fixing typos. > >>>>> Should we skip the format release and directly jump to the > >> parquet-java > >>>>> release? > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/mr2voh7twz2hql4y59x5c7o32kntmbvm > >>>>> [2] > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/commits/master/?since=2025-03-24 > >>>>> > >>>>> Best, > >>>>> Gang > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 9:58 AM Gang Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks for the heads up! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, I think a formal vote is required before merging the PR. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best, > >>>>>> Gang > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 12:36 AM Aihua Xu <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi community, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Let me know if a vote process is needed or we can review in > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/509 (which is to > >>> remove > >>>>> the > >>>>>>> under development lines). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>> Aihua > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 10:53 AM Aihua Xu <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi Micah and community, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We’ve generated the test files from Go (PR #94 > >>>>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/parquet-testing/pull/94>) and > >>>> successfully > >>>>>>>> validated them in Parquet-Java (PR #3258 > >>>>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/pull/3258>). During > >>>> testing, > >>>>> we > >>>>>>>> identified two minor issues in the Go generation: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 1. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The spec version should be *1* instead of *0*. > >>>>>>>> 2. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The Parquet TIME type should be TIME(isAdjustedToUTC=false, > >>>> MICROS) > >>>>>>>> instead of TIME(isAdjustedToUTC=true, MICROS). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> These issues have already been addressed by Matt. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Looking ahead, here’s what I propose for closing out the Variant > >>>>>>> release: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 1. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Start a vote to finalize the Variant spec (removing the two > >>> lines > >>>>>>>> under *active development*). > >>>>>>>> 2. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Start a vote for the Parquet-Java 1.16.0 release. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please share your thoughts on these next steps, or let me know > >> if > >>>> you > >>>>>>> see > >>>>>>>> anything else we should address before proceeding. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>> Aihua > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 9:28 PM Micah Kornfield < > >>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> You want to see if the write path in GO is compatible? Let > >>>>>>>>>> me check with Matt on this. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Yes, IIUC, I think there are now multiple OSS reader > >>>> implementations, > >>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>> have all been validated against parquet-java writing. So I > >> think > >>>> it > >>>>> is > >>>>>>>>> important we validate a second writer can produce files that > >> can > >>> be > >>>>>>> read > >>>>>>>>> by > >>>>>>>>> parquet-java. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>> Micah > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:17 AM Aihua Xu <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi Micah, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> What we have done is to generate a large set of the test > >> cases > >>>> from > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>> Iceberg project and validate in Java and GO. All of those > >>>>>>>>> implementations > >>>>>>>>>> are independent. You want to see if the write path in GO is > >>>>>>> compatible? > >>>>>>>>> Let > >>>>>>>>>> me check with Matt on this. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>> Aihua > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 9:24 PM Micah Kornfield < > >>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> We have completed cross-language validation for variant > >> and > >>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> implementation compatibility appears solid > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Great, apologies if I missed it but did we verify Java > >> being > >>>> able > >>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>> read > >>>>>>>>>>> Go's output? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 9:38 PM Aihua Xu <[email protected] > >>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> We have completed cross-language validation for variant > >> and > >>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> implementation compatibility appears solid. Matt has > >> raised > >>>>> some > >>>>>>>>>> comments > >>>>>>>>>>>> regarding how to handle invalid cases. In fact, we had a > >>> long > >>>>>>>>>> discussion > >>>>>>>>>>>> during the spec development about whether to explicitly > >>>> define > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> behavior > >>>>>>>>>>>> for such cases. We should be able to clear that out soon. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 8, 2025, at 2:35 PM, Jia Yu <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Gang, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for letting me know. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Would it make sense to create a new Parquet Java branch > >>>> that > >>>>>>>>> includes > >>>>>>>>>>> all > >>>>>>>>>>>>> other commits except the Variant type implementation? > >>> That > >>>>>>> way, we > >>>>>>>>>>> could > >>>>>>>>>>>>> release a version without Variant entirely. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> We’re eager to get the Geo type released, but at the > >> same > >>>>>>> time, we > >>>>>>>>>>> don’t > >>>>>>>>>>>>> want to rush the Variant work or ship something that’s > >>> not > >>>>>>> fully > >>>>>>>>>> ready. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jia > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 1:25 AM Gang Wu < > >>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> parquet-cpp does not implement variant type yet, so it > >>> is > >>>>>>> safe to > >>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the geo types. IIUC, there is no easy way to block > >> users > >>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>> producing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> files with variant types in parquet-java, so this is > >> the > >>>>> main > >>>>>>>>>> concern. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps Aihua can provide an update on the progress? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gang > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 5:11 AM Jia Yu < > >>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for all your hard work on Parquet. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for my ignorance, but I’d like to better > >>> understand > >>>>> why > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> Parquet > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Java release for Geo types is currently tied to the > >>>> Variant > >>>>>>> type > >>>>>>>>>>> work. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arrow C++ (Parquet C++) has already been released > >> with > >>>> Geo > >>>>>>> type > >>>>>>>>>>>> support, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and it doesn’t seem to have encountered similar > >> issues. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Geo type support in Iceberg has been stalled for > >>>>> several > >>>>>>>>> months > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> because > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Iceberg PMC cannot review or merge the > >>> implementation > >>>>>>> until > >>>>>>>>>>>> there’s a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corresponding Parquet Java release. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be possible to proceed with a new Parquet > >> Java > >>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>> Geo, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and mark the Variant type as experimental or keep it > >>>>> behind a > >>>>>>>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> flag? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’d really appreciate your thoughts on this and am > >>>> looking > >>>>>>>>> forward > >>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> your > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> response. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jia > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 10:33 AM Aihua Xu < > >>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seems the concern from Gabor is that we should > >>> finalize > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>> Variant > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ( > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/VariantEncoding.md > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/VariantShredding.md > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ), > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a parquet-format release, and then move forward > >>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>> parquet-java > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. I totally agree. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We should have met the requirement with two > >> reference > >>>>>>>>>>> implementations > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant in open source and I will start a VOTE > >> thread > >>>>>>>>> separately > >>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> close > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out the Variant spec if no objections. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the discussions. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aihua > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 3:41 AM Andrew Lamb < > >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At this point, I’d like to check if we have enough > >>>>>>>>>> implementation > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coverage > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to move forward with finalizing the Variant spec. > >>>> Would > >>>>> it > >>>>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sense > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> start a vote thread at this stage? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In my opinion we have sufficient open source > >>>>>>> implementations > >>>>>>>>> (the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Golang > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation on arrow-go) and a vote to finalize > >>> the > >>>>> spec > >>>>>>>>> would > >>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate (and welcome) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From my experience working on the Rust > >> implementation > >>>> so > >>>>>>> far, > >>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the spec clear and easy to understand, the design > >>> well > >>>>>>> thought > >>>>>>>>>> out, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have not encountered anything that would require > >> any > >>>>>>> changes. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kudos to the team who designed and wrote the spec > >> for > >>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>> feature, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 2:08 AM Jia Yu < > >>>> [email protected] > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Aihua! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The geo type implementation in Iceberg is > >> currently > >>>>>>> blocked > >>>>>>>>> by > >>>>>>>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. Really looking forward to it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jia > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 10:47 PM Gábor Szádovszky > >> < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My concern was related to the current stage of > >> the > >>>>>>> Variant > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specification > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the fact that we started talking about > >>> releasing > >>>>>>>>>> parquet-java > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant features. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we formally release parquet-format with the > >>>>> finalized > >>>>>>>>>> Variant > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first, then I have no concerns about writing > >>> Variant > >>>>>>> values > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upcoming > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parquet-java release. Otherwise, we need to block > >>> it > >>>> by > >>>>>>>>> default > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mark > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as an experimental feature. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gabor > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aihua Xu <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: > >>>> 2025. > >>>>>>> júl. > >>>>>>>>>> 16., > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sze, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 19:37): > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Gabor and all, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here’s my current understanding of the progress > >> on > >>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Variant* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Parquet: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Per Parquet's requirements, we need at least > >> two > >>>>>>>>> reference > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementations to finalize the Variant > >> logical > >>>> type > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specification. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The community is actively working on Java, Go, > >>> and > >>>>>>> Rust > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementations: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Java already has the encoding and shredding > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementations > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> place: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant Decoding < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/pull/3197> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant Encoding < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/pull/3202> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant Shredding Writer > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/issues/3223> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant Shredding Reader > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/issues/3211> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go also includes encoding and shredding > >>>> support: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant Encoding/Decoding > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > >>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow-go/pull/344> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant Shredding < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow-go/pull/434> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rust is currently working on the shredding > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition to these, we already have a full > >>> Variant > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Iceberg, as well as in some closed-source > >>>>>>> engines. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At this point, I’d like to check if we have > >> enough > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coverage > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to move forward with finalizing the Variant > >> spec. > >>>>> Would > >>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sense > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> start a vote thread at this stage? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ultimately, our goal is to release a new version > >>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parquet-format > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parquet-java that includes the Variant logical > >>> type, > >>>>> so > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iceberg > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other engines can officially depend on it and > >>>> proceed > >>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> further > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me know your thoughts and how we should > >>> proceed. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aihua > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 13, 2025 at 10:08 PM Gábor > >> Szádovszky > >>> < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was not able to open the recordings of the > >> last > >>>>>>> meeting > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission issues. (Shouldn't these be > >> accessible > >>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyone?) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, I'm not sure if you have talked about this, > >>> but > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Variant > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still not final. Since parquet-java already has > >>>>> Variant > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prevent writing potentially invalid Variant > >> data > >>>> with > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logical > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> types we will use for the finalized spec? Is it > >>>>> behind > >>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flag? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gabor > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aihua Xu <[email protected]> ezt írta > >> (időpont: > >>>>> 2025. > >>>>>>>>> júl. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11., > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 19:33): > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi community, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As discussed in the last community sync-up > >>>> meeting, > >>>>>>> I'd > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proceed > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with releasing *Parquet-Java 1.16.0*, which > >> will > >>>>>>> include > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *geo-type* and *variant*. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if you have any objections > >> or > >>>> if > >>>>>>> you > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upcoming > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes you'd like to include in this release. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aihua > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> >
