Hi, Unless I’m mistaken we have a number of format implementation completeness deficits that would make it hard to do a 1.0 release until they are taken care of
* Null type * Union types * Dictionary deltas and replacements (Anything else?) Note on this last item, the integration test JSON format is deficient for describing dictionary deltas and replacements. Short of completing these issues in the next 2 weeks I would strongly suggest a 0.16.0 major release without delay. Thanks On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 5:30 AM Fan Liya <liya.fa...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am sorry. I did not notice the issues have already been assigned. > > Best, > Liya Fan > > On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 12:15 PM Fan Liya <liya.fa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Jacques, > > > > I am interested in the issues, and if it is possible, I would like to try > > to resolve them. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Liya Fan > > > > On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 7:16 AM Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > >> I identified three things in the java library that I think are top of > mind > >> and should be fixed before 1.0 to avoid weird incompatibility changes in > >> the java apis (technical debt). I've tagged them as pre-1.0 as I don't > >> exactly see what is the right way to tag/label a target release for a > >> ticket. > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-7495?jql=labels%20%3D%20pre-1.0 > >> > >> For the three tickets I identified, does anyone have interest in trying > to > >> resolve? > >> > >> thanks, > >> Jacques > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 11:55 AM Neal Richardson < > >> neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > Happy new year! As we look ahead to 2020, it's time to start > mobilizing > >> for > >> > the Arrow 1.0 release. At 0.15, I believe we decided that our next > >> release > >> > should be 1.0, and it's been a couple of months since 0.15, so we're > >> due to > >> > release again this month, give or take. (See [1] for when we most > >> recently > >> > discussed doing 1.0 back in June, or if you're a fan of ancient > history, > >> > see [2] for a similar discussion from July 2017.) > >> > > >> > Since there appeared to be consensus before that it is time for 1.0, > >> let's > >> > discuss how to get it done. One first step would be to make sure that > >> we've > >> > identified all format/specification issues we think we must resolve > >> before > >> > declaring 1.0. [3] shows 3 "blockers" for the 1.0 release already. > There > >> > are an additional 14 "Format" issues ([4]); perhaps some of those > should > >> > also be labeled blockers for 1.0. > >> > > >> > It would be great if folks could review Jira in their areas of > expertise > >> > and make sure everything essential for 1.0 is ticketed and prioritized > >> > appropriately. Once we've identified the required tasks for making a > 1.0 > >> > release, we can work together on burning those down. > >> > > >> > Neal > >> > > >> > [1]: > >> > > >> > > >> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/44a7a3d256ab5dbd62da6fe45b56951b435697426bf4adedb6520907@%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E > >> > > >> > [2]: > >> > > >> > > >> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0aca401e8906e1adbb37228b38569a9a7736b864da854007dad111c3%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E > >> > [3]: > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ARROW/Arrow+1.0.0+Release > >> > [4]: > >> > > >> > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20status%20in%20(%22In%20Review%22%2C%20Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.0.0%20AND%20component%20%3D%20Format > >> > > >> > > >
