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 >>>
