+1 (binding) In <20241122.102452.1575817907085915519....@clear-code.com> "Re: [DISCUSS] Split Java release process" on Fri, 22 Nov 2024 10:24:52 +0900 (JST), Sutou Kouhei <k...@clear-code.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > Thanks all. It seems that we could collect all opinions for > this proposal. I'll start a vote for this proposal. > > Thanks, > -- > kou > > In <20241118.165504.963500056633602181....@clear-code.com> > "[DISCUSS] Split Java release process" on Mon, 18 Nov 2024 16:55:04 +0900 > (JST), > Sutou Kouhei <k...@clear-code.com> wrote: > >> 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, >> -- >> kou
