+1, makes sense to me. Since many of the Arrow libraries are at a more stable phase of development, it makes sense that they should have a release process and cadence that matches, and that those that are under active development should be able to move ahead more freely.
Neal On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 3:25 AM Raúl Cumplido <rau...@apache.org> wrote: > I am also +1 on moving the Java implementation to its own repository. > > I am also happy to help with the releases on the Java repository and, > as with Go, I am also happy to help with some of the migration tasks. > > As a side note, in general I tend to have more problems with > JavaScript when releasing, verifying, etcetera. I would love for > JavaScript to move to its own repository but here I think we have to > make a bigger effort on finding committers and PMCs to have an active > and stable maintenance. > > Thanks, > Raúl > > El lun, 18 nov 2024 a las 9:17, David Li (<lidav...@apache.org>) escribió: > > > > While early, it seems to have gone well for Go. The ability to do more > frequent point releases for Java might be interesting. > > > > Since the JNI JARs bundle the C++ libraries when built, we can build off > of the latest released C++ version whenever the Java project needs to > release, and not have to worry too much about maintaining runtime > compatibility with multiple versions (only with making sure we aren't > "caught out" by upstream changes). > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024, at 17:07, Gang Wu wrote: > > > +1 on splitting the Java codebase! > > > > > > I'm not an active contributor/reviewer to the Java codebase, though I > have > > > several contributions to it in the past. I can volunteer to be a > release > > > manager > > > on the Java side if I can help. I have some experience in releasing > orc and > > > parquet-java in the past. > > > > > > Best, > > > Gang > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 4:01 PM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Hi Kou, > > >> > > >> Thanks a lot for bringing this. > > >> > > >> I'm +1 on the principle, both for splitting the Java release process > and > > >> moving the Java implementation into another repository. > > >> > > >> We do need to find more maintainers for Arrow Java, but that is true > > >> regardless of whether the Java implementation stays in the monorepo. > > >> > > >> (also, I don't know if David Li would like to be described as > > >> "Java-focused" :-)) > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> > > >> Antoine. > > >> > > >> > > >> Le 18/11/2024 à 08:55, Sutou Kouhei a écrit : > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > This is a similar discussion to the "[DISCUSS] Split Go > > >> > release process" thread: > > >> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/fstyfvzczntt9mpnd4f0b39lzb8cxlyf > > >> > > > >> > How about splitting Java release process from other > > >> > apache/arrow components like apache/arrow-go? Here are > > >> > some reasons of this proposal: > > >> > > > >> > * The Java implementation is a native implementation not > > >> > bindings > > >> > * Some modules are the bindings of the C++ implementation > > >> > but we can support multiple C++ version if needed like > > >> > the R implementation does > > >> > * We can simplify apache/arrow release by splitting the Java > > >> > implementation > > >> > * We'll be able to use more minor/patch releases for the > > >> > Java implementation instead of major releases like the Go > > >> > implementation > > >> > > > >> > Here is my idea how to proceed this: > > >> > > > >> > 1. Extract java/ in apache/arrow to apache/arrow-java like > > >> > apache/arrow-go > > >> > * Filter java/ related commits from apache/arrow and create > > >> > apache/arrow-java with them like we did for apache/arrow-go > > >> > * Remove java/ related codes from apache/arrow > > >> > 2. Prepare integration test CI like apache/arrow-go does: > > >> > > > >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow-go/blob/main/.github/workflows/test.yml > > >> > 3. Prepare release script based on apache/arrow-go > > >> > > > >> > We can reuse some release scripts in dev/release/ in > > >> > apache/arrow like we did in apache/arrow-adbc. > > >> > > > >> > Cons of this idea: > > >> > > > >> > * There is only one active Java focused PMC member and > > >> > committer: David Li > > >> > * We need to increase active Java focused PMC members and > > >> > committers for stable maintenance > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > What do you think about this? > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Thanks, > > >> >
