There are two trivial Rust PRs pending that I would like to see merged for the release.
ARROW-7794: [Rust] Support releasing arrow-flight https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6858 ARROW-8357: [Rust] [DataFusion] Dockerfile for CLI is missing format dir https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6860 Thanks, Andy. On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:55 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > Also nice to have perhaps (PR available and several back-and-forths > already): > > * ARROW-7610: [Java] Finish support for 64 bit int allocations > > Needs a Java committer to decide... > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > Le 06/04/2020 à 00:24, Wes McKinney a écrit : > > 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 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>> >
