+1 (binding) On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 10:05 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 (binding) > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 4:10 AM vin jake <jakevin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > +1, It's reasonable > > > > On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 9:56 PM Andy Grove <andygrov...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > I would like to propose that we move the Ballista project to a new > > > top-level *arrow-ballista* repository. > > > > > > The rationale for this (copied from the GitHub issue [1]) is: > > > > > > - > > > > > > Decouple release process for DataFusion and Ballista > > > - > > > > > > Allow each project to have top-level documentation and user guides > that > > > are targeting the appropriate audience > > > - > > > > > > Reduce issue tracking and PR review burden for DataFusion > maintainers > > > who are not as interested in Ballista > > > - > > > > > > Help avoid accidental circular dependencies being introduced > between the > > > projects (such as [3]) > > > - > > > > > > Helps formalize the public API for DataFusion that other query > engines > > > should be using > > > > > > There is a design docment [3] that outlines the plan for implementing > this. > > > > > > Only votes from PMC members are binding, but all members of the > community > > > are encouraged to test the release and vote with "(non-binding)". The > vote > > > will run for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > [ ] +1 Proceed with moving Ballista to a new arrow-ballista repository > [ ] > > > +0 > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not proceed with moving Ballista to a new arrow-ballista > > > repository because ... > > > > > > Here is my vote: > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/issues/2502 > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/issues/2433 > > > > > > [3] > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jNRbadyStSrV5kifwn0khufAwq6OnzGczG4z8oTQJP4/edit?usp=sharing > > > >
