That may be so. If we do partially revert it (the dict return value is the only thing probably that needs to be changed), we need to get the downstream libraries to make changes to allow us to make this change. Another option is returning the KV wrapper via another attribute.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020, 3:06 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > Hmm, if downstream libraries were expecting a dict, perhaps we'll need > to revert that change... > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > Le 06/04/2020 à 08:50, Joris Van den Bossche a écrit : > > We also have a recent regression related to the KeyValueMetadata wrapping > > python that is causing failures in downstream libraries, that seems a > > blocker for the release: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-8342 > > > > On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 00:25, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> We are getting close to the 0.17.0 endgame. > >> > >> Here are the 18 JIRAs still in the 0.17.0 milestone. There are a few > >> issues without patches yet so we should decide quickly whether they > >> need to be included. Are they any blocking issues not accounted for in > >> the milestone? > >> > >> * ARROW-6947 [Rust] [DataFusion] Add support for scalar UDFs > >> > >> Patch available > >> > >> * ARROW-7794 [Rust] cargo publish fails for arrow-flight due to > >> relative path to Flight.proto > >> > >> No patch yet > >> > >> * ARROW-7222 [Python][Release] Wipe any existing generated Python API > >> documentation when updating website > >> > >> This issue needs to be addressed by the release manager and the > >> Confluence instructions must be updated. > >> > >> * ARROW-7891 [C++] RecordBatch->Equals should also have a > >> check_metadata argument > >> > >> Patch available that needs to be reviewed and approved > >> > >> * ARROW-8164: [C++][Dataset] Let datasets be viewable with non-identical > >> schema > >> > >> Patch available, but failures to be resolved > >> > >> * ARROW-7965: [Python] Hold a reference to the dataset factory for later > >> reuse > >> > >> Depends on ARROW-8164, will require rebase > >> > >> * ARROW-8039: [Python][Dataset] Support using dataset API in > >> pyarrow.parquet with a minimal ParquetDataset shim > >> > >> Patch pending > >> > >> * ARROW-8047: [Python][Documentation] Document migration from > >> ParquetDataset to pyarrow.datasets > >> > >> May be tackled beyond 0.17.0 > >> > >> * ARROW-8063: [Python] Add user guide documentation for Datasets API > >> > >> May be tackled beyond 0.17.0 > >> > >> * ARROW-8149 [C++/Python] Enable CUDA Support in conda recipes > >> > >> Does not seem strictly necessary for release, since a packaging issue > >> > >> * ARROW-8162: [Format][Python] Add serialization for CSF sparse tensors > >> > >> Patch available, but needs review. May > >> > >> * ARROW-8213: [Python][Dataset] Opening a dataset with a local > >> incorrect path gives confusing error message > >> > >> Nice to have, but not essential > >> > >> * ARROW-8266: [C++] Add backup mirrors for external project source > >> downloads > >> > >> Patch available, nice to have > >> > >> * ARROW-8275 [Python][Docs] Review Feather + IPC file documentation > >> per "Feather V2" changes > >> > >> Patch available > >> > >> * ARROW-8300 [R] Documentation and changelog updates for 0.17 > >> > >> Patch available > >> > >> * ARROW-8320 [Documentation][Format] Clarify (lack of) alignment > >> requirements in C data interface > >> > >> Patch available > >> > >> * ARROW-8330: [Documentation] The post release script generates the > >> documentation with a development version > >> > >> Patch available > >> > >> * ARROW-8335: [Release] Add crossbow jobs to run release verification > >> > >> Patch in progress > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:23 PM Fan Liya <liya.fa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I see ARROW-6871 in the list. > >>> It seems it has some bugs, which are being fixed by ARROW-8239. > >>> So I have added ARROW-8239 to the list. > >>> > >>> The PR for ARROW-8239 is already approved, so it is expected to be > >> resolved > >>> soon. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Liya Fan > >>> > >>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:01 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com > > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I moved the Java issues out of 0.17.0, they seem complex enough or not > >> of > >>>> enough significance to make them blockers for 0.17.0 release. If > >> owners of > >>>> the issues disagree please move them back int. > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:05 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> We've made good progress, but there are still 35 issues in the > >>>>> backlog. Some of them are documentation related, but there are some > >>>>> functionality-related patches that could be at risk. If all could > >>>>> review again to trim out anything that isn't going to make the cut > >> for > >>>>> 0.17.0, please do > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:39 PM Andy Grove <andygrov...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I just took a first pass at reviewing the Java and Rust issues and > >>>>> removed > >>>>>> some from the 0.17.0 release. There are a few small Rust issues > >> that I > >>>> am > >>>>>> actively working on for this release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 1:13 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> hi Neal, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks for helping coordinate. I agree we should be in a > >> position to > >>>>>>> release sometime next week. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Can folks from the Rust and Java side review issues in the > >> backlog? > >>>>>>> According to the dashboard there are 19 Rust issues open and 7 > >> Java > >>>>>>> issues. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:01 AM Neal Richardson > >>>>>>> <neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>>>> A few weeks ago, there seemed to be consensus (lazy, at least) > >> for > >>>> a > >>>>> 0.17 > >>>>>>>> release at the end of the month. Judging from > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ARROW/Arrow+0.17.0+Release, > >>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>> looks like we're getting closer. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'd encourage everyone to review their backlogs and (1) bump > >> from > >>>>> 0.17 > >>>>>>>> scope any tickets they don't plan to finish this week, and (2) > >> if > >>>>> there > >>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>> any issues that should block release, make sure they are > >> flagged as > >>>>>>>> "blockers". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Neal > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:39 AM Wes McKinney < > >> wesmck...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> It seems like the consensus is to push for a 0.17.0 major > >> release > >>>>>>>>> sooner rather than doing a patch release, since releases in > >>>> general > >>>>>>>>> are costly. This is fine with me. I see that a 0.17.0 > >> milestone > >>>> has > >>>>>>>>> been created in JIRA and some JIRA gardening has begun. Do > >> you > >>>>> think > >>>>>>>>> we can be in a position to release by the week of March 23 > >> or the > >>>>> week > >>>>>>>>> of March 30? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 8:39 PM Wes McKinney < > >> wesmck...@gmail.com > >>>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> If people are generally on board with accelerating a 0.17.0 > >>>> major > >>>>>>>>>> release, then I would suggest renaming "1.0.0" to "0.17.0" > >> and > >>>>>>>>>> beginning to do issue gardening to whittle things down to > >>>>>>>>>> critical-looking bugs and high probability patches for the > >> next > >>>>>>> couple > >>>>>>>>>> of weeks. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:31 AM Wes McKinney < > >>>>> wesmck...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I recall there are some other issues that have been > >> reported > >>>> or > >>>>>>> fixed > >>>>>>>>>>> that are critical and not yet marked with 0.16.1. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm also OK with doing a 0.17.0 release sooner > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:31 AM Neal Richardson > >>>>>>>>>>> <neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I would also be more supportive of doing 0.17 earlier > >>>>> instead of > >>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>> patch > >>>>>>>>>>>> release. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Neal > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 9:29 AM Neal Richardson < > >>>>>>>>> neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> If releases were costless to make, I'd be all for > >> it, but > >>>>> it's > >>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>>> clear > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to me that it's worth the diversion from other > >> priorities > >>>>> to > >>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>> a release > >>>>>>>>>>>>> right now. Nothing on > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARROW%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.16.1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> jumps out to me as super urgent--what are you seeing > >> as > >>>>>>> critical? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> If we did decide to go forward, would it be possible > >> to > >>>> do > >>>>> a > >>>>>>>>> release that > >>>>>>>>>>>>> is limited to the affected implementations (say, do a > >>>>>>> Python-only > >>>>>>>>> release)? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That might reduce the cost of building and verifying > >>>>> enough to > >>>>>>>>> make it > >>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable to consider. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Neal > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 8:19 AM Krisztián Szűcs < > >>>>>>>>> szucs.kriszt...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 5:07 PM Wes McKinney < > >>>>>>> wesmck...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi folks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There have been a number of critical issues > >> reported > >>>>> (many > >>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>> them > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed already) since 0.16.0 was released. Is there > >>>>> interest > >>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preparing a patch 0.16.1 release (with backported > >>>>> patches > >>>>>>> onto a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maint-0.16.x branch as with 0.15.1) since the next > >>>> major > >>>>>>>>> release is a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minimum of 6-8 weeks away from general > >> availability? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Did the 0.15.1 patch release helper script that > >>>>> Krisztian > >>>>>>> wrote > >>>>>>>>> get > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributed as a PR? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not yet, but it is available at > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/kszucs/b2743546044ccd3215e5bb34fa0d76a0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wes > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > > >
