GitHub user rok edited a comment on the discussion: A new home for pyarrow-stubs?
Another update. Following received feedback I've created a [second draft](https://github.com/rok/arrow/pull/45). This one takes the approach of adding pyarrow-stubs, then checks annotations on a single test file (test_compute.py) using `pyright`. To make checks pass stubs are fixed in the PR. A question I have here is: do we work on a feature branch until we have full coverage or do we merge partial? The idea would be that CI would report stub check failures and we can enforce annotations remain in sync. Type coverage, stub linter and pre-commit hook were some ideas suggested so far that can come later. I would propose we inline annotations where possible - @mpelko did a proof of concept [here](https://github.com/mpelko/arrow/pull/2). If there are no significant objections I'll open a PR against the main repo and start a ML discussion. GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/arrow/discussions/45919#discussioncomment-14182963 ---- This is an automatically sent email for [email protected]. To unsubscribe, please send an email to: [email protected]
