+1 (binding)
Verified on M3 Mac.
Thanks Andrew.
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 2:20 PM Andrew Lamb wrote:
>
> I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow DataFusion Implementation,
> version 37.1.0.
>
> Note this is the second RC (the first RC[4] did not include the change to
> the version
Unfortunately it appears I made an error and forgot to update the release
version in this RC
I have started a new thread[1] for a second RC
Andrew
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/0md6qyhw0hody8p0v9wddvt7vo8r8z2x
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 2:23 PM Andrew Lamb wrote:
> Thanks Andy, Jake and
I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow DataFusion Implementation,
version 37.1.0.
Note this is the second RC (the first RC[4] did not include the change to
the version numbers[5] :facepalm:). I apologize for the runaround.
This release candidate is based on commit:
Thanks Andy, Jake and L.C.
> Note that I still had to set RUST_MIN_STACK to avoid a stack overflow. I
don't know if that is still expected.
Yes I do think that is still expected unfortunately and is consistent with
the 37.0.0 release[1] (we didn't change anything in 37.1.0 RC1 that would
alter
+1(binding)
Verified on m1 macbook
Thanks Raphael
Raphael Taylor-Davies 于
2024年4月18日周四 下午6:55写道：
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow Rust Object
> Store Implementation, version 0.10.0.
>
> This release candidate is based on commit:
>
+1 (binding)
Verified on M3 Mac.
Thanks Raphael.
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 7:07 AM Andrew Lamb wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> I reviewed the breaking API changes and the changelog and ran the
> verification scripts
>
> Thank you Raphael
>
> Andrew
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 6:55 AM Raphael
+1 (binding)
Verified on M3 Mac. Tests are passed with RUST_MIN_STACK.
Thanks Andrew.
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 7:51 AM vin jake wrote:
>
> +1(binding)
>
> Thanks alamb for your work and efforts.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 10:01 PM Andrew Lamb wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to
Hi,
As discussed on the mailing list [1] I plan to generate a new MINOR
release 16.1.0 to accommodate some features that missed the deadline
for 16.0.0.
As this is a MINOR release if there are any features that you want to
include that are non-breaking changes please add them to the 16.1.0
+1(binding)
Thanks alamb for your work and efforts.
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 10:01 PM Andrew Lamb wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow DataFusion
> Implementation,
> version 37.1.0, a patch release with some bug fixes. Please see [4] for
> details.
> There is a
+1
Verified on Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS
Note that I still had to set RUST_MIN_STACK to avoid a stack overflow. I
don't know if that is still expected.
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 8:01 AM Andrew Lamb wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow DataFusion
> Implementation,
>
+1 (binding)
I reviewed the breaking API changes and the changelog and ran the
verification scripts
Thank you Raphael
Andrew
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 6:55 AM Raphael Taylor-Davies
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow Rust Object
> Store Implementation, version
Hi,
I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow DataFusion Implementation,
version 37.1.0, a patch release with some bug fixes. Please see [4] for
details.
There is a failing CI test which only affects development tools [6].
While DataFusion is now officially its own top level Apache
As a follow up to this thread, and several others on this mailing list, I
am pleased to announce that the proposal to create the DataFusion Top Level
Project passed unanimously at the April 2023 ASF board meeting.
Thank you to everyone in the Arrow community who has helped nurture this
subproject
Hi,
I would like to propose a release of Apache Arrow Rust Object
Store Implementation, version 0.10.0.
This release candidate is based on commit:
cd3331989d65f6d56830f9ffa758b4c96d10f4be [1]
The proposed release tarball and signatures are hosted at [2].
The changelog is located at [3].
Wow! I like the style!
In
"Re: AW: Personal feedback on your last release on Apache Arrow ADBC 0.11.0"
on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 06:18:00 +0100,
Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Something that I do on releases is to count the binding/non binding
> vote in the result email (to have a clear result).
OK. I'll use "+1 (binding)" style.
In
"Re: AW: Personal feedback on your last release on Apache Arrow ADBC 0.11.0"
on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 06:40:00 +,
Christofer Dutz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> No need to apologize. It was me who didn't find you. Guess when you go
> through all vote
+1 (binding)
I ran the followings on Debian GNU/Linux sid:
* TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
TEST_SOURCE=1 \
LANG=C \
TZ=UTC \
ARROW_CMAKE_OPTIONS="-DBoost_NO_BOOST_CMAKE=ON -Dxsimd_SOURCE=BUNDLED" \
dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 16.0.0 0
* TEST_DEFAULT=0 \
Hi all,
No need to apologize. It was me who didn't find you. Guess when you go through
all vote threads of one third of all apache projects in a couple of days, that
can happen.
But yes: adding that "binding" for pmc members is always a good idea.
Chris
Gesendet von Outlook für
18 matches
Mail list logo
