Hi Wes, I was only thinking about having different versions for the subcrates but still the same release process for them. Does version number make a difference in this case?
On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:17 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > > For instance, the parquet crate use to have version 0.4.2 before merging > into arrow, and I think it's better to maintain the continuity there. > > This could be a little bit problematic from an ASF release point of > view. Do you want to do separate release votes for the subcrates (this > creates extra work for maintainers)? If not then it is probably best > to use the same version everywhere. > > - Wes > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 1:32 AM Kouhei Sutou <k...@clear-code.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I have no opinion about version of sub-crates. > > > > When should we bump version of sub-crates? Is it a matter of > > Rust developers rather than release managers? > > > > I just want to know whether release managers need to care > > version of sub-crates or not. > > > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > kou > > > > In <caf6ot1e5gixah8qgcnubyscnadvscyiwm5jqpbss6yzmajz...@mail.gmail.com> > > "[Rust] crate versions and release process" on Wed, 2 Jan 2019 > 21:27:45 -0800, > > Chao Sun <sunc...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > This is related to an earlier email I sent regarding separating the > Rust > > > implementation into sub crates. See some early discussions in this PR > > > [1]. As we could have multiple crates for the project in future (e.g., > > > arrow, parquet, orc, gandiva), I'm wondering whether we can keep > different > > > versions for these crates. For instance, the parquet crate use to have > > > version 0.4.2 before merging into arrow, and I think it's better to > > > maintain the continuity there. > > > > > > Another thing is about release cycles. I understand that it is best to > keep > > > the release cycles for these crates the same as arrow's. However, it's > > > possible in future that we may need a minor release for a critical bug > fix > > > of a particular crate, and to follow the overall release process for > that > > > seems like an overkill and not quite feasible. > > > > > > Therefore, I'm proposing to: > > > 1. allow different versions for sub-crates. > > > 2. follow the overall release schedule, but maintain the flexibility of > > > doing separate releases when necessary. > > > > > > Thought? > > > > > > Chao > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/3291#issuecomment-450950275 >
