My vote: +1

The vote passes with 4 binding +1 votes, 8 non-binding +1 votes, and no -1 
votes. Thanks all!

I will update the RFC PR and merge it next, and will continue setting up the CI 
and release process.

-David

On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 15:38, David Li wrote:
> Kirill (CC'd) mentioned the organization could be improved [1] - I've 
> put up a PR to move the definitions around to make it easier for 
> implementors [2].
>
> I'll leave this thread open for a little while longer for any 
> interested parties/see if anyone has PR comments before I'll merge the 
> PR/vote/close/etc. Thanks all!
>
> [1]: https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/issues/145
> [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/pull/148
>
> -David
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 15:27, Neal Richardson wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> (I think this makes 4 binding +1s, if I count correctly)
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 11:30 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> +1 (binding), with the caveat that I looked mostly at the C API.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Antoine.
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 21/09/2022 à 17:40, David Li a écrit :
>>> > Hello,
>>> >
>>> > We have been discussing [1] standard interfaces for Arrow-based database
>>> access and have been working on implementations of the proposed interfaces
>>> [2], all under the name "ADBC". This proposal aims to provide a unified
>>> client abstraction across Arrow-native database protocols (like Flight SQL)
>>> and non-Arrow database protocols, which can then be used by Arrow projects
>>> like Dataset/Acero and ecosystem projects like Ibis.
>>> >
>>> > For details, see the RFC here:
>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/14079
>>> >
>>> > I would like to propose that the Arrow project adopt this RFC, along
>>> with apache/arrow-adbc commit 7866a56 [3], as version 1.0.0 of the ADBC API
>>> standard.
>>> >
>>> > Please vote to adopt the specification as described above. (This is not
>>> a vote to release any components.)
>>> >
>>> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>> >
>>> > [ ] +1 Adopt the ADBC specification
>>> > [ ]  0
>>> > [ ] -1 Do not adopt the specification because...
>>> >
>>> > Thanks to the DuckDB and R DBI projects for providing feedback on and
>>> implementations of the proposal.
>>> >
>>> > [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/cq7t9s5p7dw4vschylhwsfgqwkr5fmf2
>>> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc
>>> > [3]:
>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/commit/7866a566f5b7b635267bfb7a87ea49b01dfe89fa
>>> >
>>> > Thank you,
>>> > David
>>>

Reply via email to