The Vote passes with 10 binding +1 votes, 1 non-binding +1 vote and no 0 or
-1 votes.

Binding:
Matt
Antoine
Rok
Jacob
Ian
Micah
Sutou
Gang
Curt
Dewey

Non-Binding:
Xuwei

Once the discussions on the PR are settled and approved, it'll get merged
to add it to the docs.

Thank you everyone!

--Matt

On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 1:10 PM Dewey Dunnington <dewey.dunning...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> +1 (binding)!
>
> Thank you for putting together and iterating on this proposal!
>
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 11:14 AM Curt Hagenlocher <c...@hagenlocher.org>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 12:35 AM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2025, at 12:06, Gang Wu wrote:
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 11:01 AM Sutou Kouhei <k...@clear-code.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1 (binding)
> > > >>
> > > >> In <CAH4123Z0QpnqAzPyGcR_zfzrLqDtBx7RwvnoUMMUf5Z7EG3=
> > j...@mail.gmail.com>
> > > >>   "[VOTE][Format] Add Canonical Variant Extension type" on Mon, 1
> Sep
> > > 2025
> > > >> 14:57:20 -0400,
> > > >>   Matt Topol <zotthewiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hello,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I'd like to propose a canonical extension type for Parquet's
> > 'Variant'
> > > >> > type. Prior discussions can be found at [1], along with the
> proposal
> > > at
> > > >> > [2]. The Go implementation can be found at [3] while work is
> > > happening on
> > > >> > the Rust implementation at [4] and C++ at [5].
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [ ] +1 Accept this proposal
> > > >> > [ ] +0
> > > >> > [ ] -1 Do not accept this proposal because...
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [1]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/46908
> > > >> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/47456
> > > >> > [3]:
> > > >> >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/arrow-go/blob/main/arrow/extensions/variant.go
> > > >> > [4]: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/issues/6736
> > > >> > [5]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/45937
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to