We've had 7 responses so far on the straw poll. For a reminder, results are here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EXhrRkYp2owGAK2e3bBw1bEvNj5O3V22iTqndBAuyG8/edit?usp=sharing My high level observations: - There isn't a lot of agreement on most questions :D. - 70% of people preferred to keep the repositories separate (5 out of 7). - All of the people who said they would be willing to "Maintain/enhance/support the Avatica build/CI" also thought the repositories should stay separate. Since maintenance is such a big part of the ongoing cost of projects and the community average slightly prefers to keep things separate, I suggest we stick with separate. Additionally, I really appreciated Julian's comment on the survey, pasted here "CI of Calcite master against Avatica master SHOULD pass but not MUST. It is advisory only.". Based on this, I would suggest we do a small modification around CI on Calcite whereby pre-commit tests do not include running against Avatica main and instead we have a post-merge CI job that monitors the status of connecting the two. This way people have "green" tests for pre-merge even if the latest Avatica doesn't match. I'd also suggest that if Calcite and Avatica are truly treated as decoupled, this allows Calcite to be released not necessarily using the latest Avatica release (treating it's upgrade policy just like any other library Calcite uses). On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 8:06 AM Vladimir Sitnikov < sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Josh>I am still upset from the porting of Avatica to Gradle > > Please migrate Avatica to whatever build system you like. > > I disagree with you a lot, however, I stop commenting as I do not see it > might change your mind. > I'm not touching Avatica anymore. > > me>I am going to delete/ignore the offending tests in Calcite in 24 hours > > Done. I commented out the test. > I hope we no longer add tests to Caclite that verify low-level Avatica > behaviour. > > Vladimir >
