The vote passes with 7 binding, 6 non-binding +1 votes. Thanks all!

I will separate the PR into multiple PRs and address the comments on the 
implementation.

Binding: Dewey Dunnington, Joris Van den Bossche, Matt Topol, Micah Kornfield, 
Raúl Cumplido, Sutou Kouhei, Weston Pace
Non-binding: Dane Pitkin, Gang Wu, Ian Cook, Jacob Wujciak-Jens, Joel 
Lubinitsky, wish maple 

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024, at 07:55, Micah Kornfield wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 2:19 PM Sutou Kouhei <k...@clear-code.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> In <8ce8b9a4-ae7a-41eb-ab6e-a5ceb2258...@app.fastmail.com>
>>   "[VOTE][Format] Opaque canonical extension type" on Wed, 24 Jul 2024
>> 14:33:01 +0900,
>>   "David Li" <lidav...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I'd like to propose the 'Opaque' canonical extension type. Prior
>> discussion can be found at [1] and the proposal and implementations for
>> C++, Go, Java, and Python can be found at [2]. The proposal is additionally
>> reproduced below.
>> >
>> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 Accept this proposal
>> > [ ] +0
>> > [ ] -1 Do not accept this proposal because...
>> >
>> > [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/8d5ldl5cb7mms21rd15lhpfrv4j9no4n
>> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/41823
>> >
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Opaque represents a type that an Arrow-based system received from an
>> external
>> > (often non-Arrow) system, but that it cannot interpret.  In this case,
>> it can
>> > pass on Opaque to its clients to at least show that a field exists and
>> > preserve metadata about the type from the other system.
>> >
>> > Extension parameters:
>> >
>> > * Extension name: ``arrow.opaque``.
>> >
>> > * The storage type of this extension is any type.  If there is no
>> underlying
>> >   data, the storage type should be Null.
>> >
>> > * Extension type parameters:
>> >
>> >   * **type_name** = the name of the unknown type in the external system.
>> >   * **vendor_name** = the name of the external system.
>> >
>> > * Description of the serialization:
>> >
>> >   A valid JSON object containing the parameters as fields.  In the
>> future,
>> >   additional fields may be added, but all fields current and future are
>> never
>> >   required to interpret the array.
>> >
>> >   Developers **should not** attempt to enable public semantic
>> interoperability
>> >   of Opaque by canonicalizing specific values of these parameters.
>>

Reply via email to