Thanks for the reply, Andrew. I will get the PR ready and send a link to this list as you suggested.
Regards, Marco. On Wed, Nov 26, 2025, 11:08 AM Andrew Lamb <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you Marco -- that sounds very interesting. > > I recommend creating a PR to the parquet-testing repository and then > sending a note to this list to try and raise its visibility. We can then > discuss the proposed additions using the normal pull request workflow. > > The major challenge for getting things into parquet-testing is finding > reviewers; The best process I know of for reviewers is this mailing list. > > Andrew > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:15 AM Marco Arguedas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I am part of a team working on an extension to the C++ implementation of > > Parquet Modular Encryption (PME). For our work, we have created a fresh > > fork of the Arrow/Parquet C++ repository, which eventually will be merged > > into the official Arrow repo. > > > > As part of our development, we have added tests which rely on new files > > that belong in the parquet-testing repo (our reasoning: the new tests are > > just extension of existing tests which rely on files in that repo). > > > > Our question is: what is the proper procedure to get these new files > > included in the parquet-testing repo? We'd like to avoid, if possible, > > keeping additional branches/forks of the parquet-testing repo. > > > > Happy to provide more details on the specifics of the new tests if > needed. > > > > Regards, > > Marco Arguedas > > >
