+1 (binding)
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:27 PM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > On Tue, May 17, 2022, at 16:00, Neal Richardson wrote: > > +1 > > > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 12:46 PM Andrew Lamb <al...@influxdata.com> wrote: > > > >> +1 (binding) > >> > >> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 9:56 AM 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 > >> > > >>
