Apologies for not participating in this discussion earlier today.
> If the Rust developers collectively want to move everything to a
different GitHub repository and use GitHub issues, let's go ahead and
do it and live with the consequences. But these principles above
simply must be followed.
I
Thanks for pointing this out. I'd be supportive of the same type of
policy for Arrow (unversioned "revolution" branches -- or separate git
repositories -- where development happens in a less regimented fashion
— i.e. without pull requests, issues, etc., but with periodic written
community
It is a propos to mention "rules for revolutionaries", a way of making
big changes in projects by forking. It was proposed by James Duncan
Davidson, then PMC chair of Tomcat, in 2000, but remains popular
within the ASF (as evidenced by this blog post [1] from 2020 by
Bertrand Delacrétaz, ASF board
Didn't this happen in the thread "[Rust] [Discuss] proposal to redesign
Arrow crate to resolve safety violations" on 7th February before any commit
in arrow2 (resulting in zero discussion or any objection)?
Best regards,
Adam Lippai
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 4:41 PM Wes McKinney wrote:
> Hi Ben,
Hi Ben,
I’m not suggesting adding any extra development process to slow things down
on an experimental project like this. My principle objection is to the lack
of discussion on the public record.
A short DISCUSS email from Jorge explaining the project and soliciting
feedback from the community
Wes,
I think we understand your administrative prerogative. I think in both
Julia and Rust cases, you just have engineers that want to go fast and do
very needed, deep changes for security and performance. I think, and this
is just my wild guess, that to go through the Apahce process (because
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 7:49 AM Wes McKinney wrote:
>
> With both what has occurred with the Julia project and what may
> possibly be occurring (what appears to me to be occurring) with these
> Rust overhaul projects, is that the communities expectations with
> regards to Openness aren't being
With both what has occurred with the Julia project and what may
possibly be occurring (what appears to me to be occurring) with these
Rust overhaul projects, is that the communities expectations with
regards to Openness aren't being followed.
If a change is significant and will affect other
On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 00:26:57 -0700
Julian Hyde wrote:
> Antoine,
>
> I need to correct your assertion
>
> > we develop on the side every day when we submit PRs from forks;
> > it's just a matter of how much complexity is being submitted at once
>
> Intuitively, there seems to be a continuum
Antoine,
I need to correct your assertion
> we develop on the side every day when we submit PRs from forks;
> it's just a matter of how much complexity is being submitted at once
Intuitively, there seems to be a continuum between a PR developed within a
project to a major feature/codebase
Hi Jorge,
I don't think you have done anything inappropriately here. I'm not able
to give a qualified advice on the arrow2 and parquet2 projects (after
all, we develop on the side every day when we submit PRs from forks;
it's just a matter of how much complexity is being submitted at
Hi,
As a PMC member, I am of course very disappointed with myself for not being
able to express some of these concerns from both Rust and other (e.g.
Julia) implementations. I do think that I was vocal enough. At some point
the interactions here started to affect my wellbeing and I thus decided
Hi Wes,
> I will say additionally: it is important to have discussions on the
mailing list to explain / draw attention to major initiatives so
others aren't left wondering what people's plans are.
As an open source contributor and developer of arrow2 and parquet2, given
how recent threads over
Hi,
I am writing this as an open source contributor and main developer of
arrow2 and parquet2.
I am really happy to see so much excitement over these two projects. I am
pretty excited about them too. They deliver higher performance (e.g. +10x
reading parquet without parallelism) and security
I will say additionally: it is important to have discussions on the
mailing list to explain / draw attention to major initiatives so
others aren't left wondering what people's plans are.
I see from the 3/10 sync call notes
"We talked about Jorge’s work on “Arrow2”. There is a desire to implement
I'm sorry to be the PMC worry wart around here, but I'm curious what
is the plan (if any) with these repositories
https://github.com/jorgecarleitao/arrow2
https://github.com/jorgecarleitao/parquet2
I understand that large new projects like this are sometimes
necessary, but what some Apache
Hi,
Sorry I am unable to attend today's (tomorrow's?) call but would like to
raise the idea of temporarily suspending major PRs against Rust
Arrow/DataFusion until the work to incorporate the two big changes for
Rust/DataFusion:
1. Jorge's major refactor/rewrite of the core Rust Arrow code.
2.
Hi Mike,
I recently added the call details in the Arrow Rust README, here:
https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/master/rust#arrow-rust-community
I've added you to the guest list so it should sync with your calendar now.
I'm happy to do this for anyone else that wants me to add them.
Hi Jorge,
Can you please confirm the starting time (and timezone) and correct Google
Meet link of the Rust and DataFusion sync calls?
I missed today's due to daylight saving time changes - which is going to
make Sydney time even harder.
Thanks
Mike
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:15 AM Jorge Cardoso
Hi,
If someone is trying to join the meeting, please try this link:
https://meet.google.com/pgx-xycf-zuf
Best,
Jorge
20 matches
Mail list logo
