Hi Antoine, Thanks for the feedback.
> 1) JSON is annoying to edit manually and doesn't support comments; Happy to switch to YAML. 2) ingesting and processing data from a HTML templating > language is cumbersome) Ingesting is actually not the problem. I agree processing is a little bit cumbersome but at this point, I'd rather keep this in Hugo for the following reasons: 1. Python or even plain Go code might be preferable, but there is no way to do this within the Hugo framework. This means there is a trade-off in developer/CI complexity for keeping a separate script up-to-date (right now, you can modify the template and Hugo will re-render automatically, making for a tight dev-loop. 2. At least at the moment, I don't anticipate a lot of changes needed to this template, and if we do find maintenance cumbersome it shouldn't be heavy lift to migrate to python. As a path forward, let me see what changes are needed to migrate to YAML, if these require a lot of changes to the current Hugo template, I can rewrite it in python. Otherwise, I'd prefer we do the migration when we observe it is needed. Cheers, Micah On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 2:38 AM Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Micah, > > Thanks a lot for taking the time to do this. > > I think this is a good idea on the principle. However, maintenance-wise, > I think it might be more future-proof to start with YAML files and have > the rendering done by a Python script. > > (rationale: 1) JSON is annoying to edit manually and doesn't support > comments; 2) ingesting and processing data from a HTML templating > language is cumbersome) > > As for point 2 below, I might also remind people of the idea I proposed > some while ago on the issue tracker, namely to define calendar-based > "presets" based on feature availability in the ~3 main open source > Parquet implementations: > https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/issues/384#issuecomment-3406653123 > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > Le 10/12/2025 à 02:02, Micah Kornfield a écrit : > > Hi Parquet Dev, > > I put a draft PR together [1] to refactor the implementation status page > > [2] to use JSON as data layer and render it using hugo code. > > > > My rationale for doing this: > > 1. I think in the long run it will make it easier to review and make > small > > updates from engines (mostly be comparing new/updates rows of JSON for a > > single engine). Adding new data for a new engine would only have to > touch a > > file specific to that engine after it is first registered. > > 2. I think it is a good idea to start collecting more metadata (in > > particular version number/release date) for implementations. I think > > displaying/tracking this might get tricky without a more structured > > approach. In particular I think having different pivots on > features/dates > > would be useful. > > > > Developing locally, the current iteration of the change generates > > effectively the same visible content. I also tried to add hyperlinks from > > notes to the actual note (at least on my browser these seem a bit weird > as > > they scroll just slightly past the note). > > > > Any objections to proceeding with this type of change? > > > > Thanks, > > Micah > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/143 > > [2] https://parquet.apache.org/docs/file-format/implementationstatus/ > > > > > >
