I think it's OK to proceed with the next RC (RC1) if the code described in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-2963 works properly after the fix. Please let us know tomorrow if you run into any more issues. Thank you!
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Marco Neumann <ma...@crepererum.net.invalid> wrote: > I'll test the PR tomorrow (Friday, until 15:00 UTC). Thanks for the quick fix! > > @Wes Might be doable, I'll check how we can improve there. Sorry for catching > this problem that late. > > I'm totally fine with the "no veto" policy. It's a bug for which no test > existed beforehand, and a behavior / feature that was just implicitly assumed > to exist (fork stability). So the regression kinda "normal". > > Marco > > On August 2, 2018 8:40:05 PM GMT+02:00, Phillip Cloud <cpcl...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>Marco, what would be even better is if you would test your application >>against Antoine's PR before it gets merged. >> >>On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:37 PM Phillip Cloud <cpcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I'll cut another one. Can someone review Antoine's PR, like ASAP, so >>that >>> I can cut another RC? >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:32 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> >>wrote: >>> >>>> -1 >>>> >>>> It's up to Phillip whether he wants to cancel the RC, but note that >>>> releases cannot be vetoed. >>>> >>>> @Marco, thanks for reporting -- is there a process which could have >>>> surfaced this issue sooner (e.g. testing your application regularly >>>> against master)? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Wes >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Le 02/08/2018 à 20:15, Li Jin a écrit : >>>> >> Antoine, >>>> >> >>>> >> Do you think we should fail this RC because of Arrow-2963? >>>> > >>>> > It's a regression, so ideally it should be fixed. >>>> > Furthermore, the issue can be reproduced quite easily in Python >>with the >>>> > (popular) multiprocessing package. >>>> > >>>> > Regards >>>> > >>>> > Antoine. >>>> >>>
