Ok, I'm deleting the 0.14.1 windows wheels then.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 3:40 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree that we should not let people install broken wheels. > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 8:38 AM Krisztián Szűcs > <szucs.kriszt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Although we have a quick fix for that [1] and the fixed wheels will be > > available soon [2] but sadly pypi doesn't support the update of already > > uploaded packages. > > > > We have three options: > > 1. delete the 0.14.1 windows wheels > > 2. draft a post release [3] only for the windows wheels, last time we > did it > > it broke a lot of users' workflows > > 3. create a 0.14.2 release > > > > In my opinion we should stick with option 1. > > > > [1]: > > > https://github.com/kszucs/arrow/commit/3b3f12c97be3436bc78374cac199a909b8f5edfe > > [2]: > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6015?focusedCommentId=16890990&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16890990 > > [3]: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0440/#post-releases > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 3:27 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > As we just found in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6015, > > > our 0.14.1 wheels have more problems (this time on Windows), so more > > > evidence that we don't have the bandwidth to properly support these > > > packages. > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 3:08 PM Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > I think what you suggest is highly dependent on who does the work. > > > > > > > > The first question is who is willing to do the work. Given that they > are > > > > volunteers, they'd probably need to propose something like this (but > with > > > > there own flavors/choices) and then we'd have to figure out how this > > > > communicated to users (especially in the context that the same > package > > > > would potentially have different capabilities if used pip vs conda). > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 8:52 PM Suvayu Ali < > fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Wes, others, > > > > > > > > > > A few thoughts from a user. Firstly, I completely understand your > > > > > frustration. I myself have delved into a bit of packaging for many > > > > > scientific computing packages, like ROOT from CERN, although not > at the > > > > > scale of users that you face here. > > > > > > > > > > AIU, wheels are a Python-first spec, whereas Arrow is a C++ first > > > library, > > > > > with python bindings. I feel this is what causes the friction in > the > > > build > > > > > chain for wheels. That said, I would like to propose the > following. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:06:41PM -0500, Wes McKinney wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > * Our wheel become much more complex due to Flight (requiring > gRPC, > > > > > > OpenSSL, and other dependencies) and Gandiva (requiring LLVM and > > > more) > > > > > > > > > > Disable the more advanced features and release reduced feature set > > > wheels, > > > > > say, only with: > > > > > 1. core data structures, Table, etc, > > > > > 2. various serialisation support (parquet, orc, etc), and > > > > > 3. plasma. > > > > > > > > > > My justification being, it covers a significant proportion of the > > > > > relatively non-expert usecases. (1) covers the interaction with > other > > > > > Python libraries, particularly pandas, (2) covers most I/O > > > requirements, > > > > > and plasma along with providing a way to manage Arrow objects > > > in-memory for > > > > > more advanced architectures, it also serves as a relatively simple > > > bridge > > > > > to other languages. Any users requiring Gandiva or Flight on > Python > > > could > > > > > easily "upgrade" to the conda-forge releases. > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Suvayu > > > > > > > > > > Open source is the future. It sets us free. > > > > > > > > >
