Hi Yufei, Thanks for the clarification.
I’d personally advocate for keeping the current module name
"apache_polaris".
The main reason is that it significantly reduces the risk of module name
collisions in user environments — "polaris" is a very common name on
PyPI and in internal packages, so the chance of conflicts is high.
The existing name "apache_polaris" clearly reflects the module’s project
affiliation and avoids these issues.
At the same time, the CLI tool name remains unchanged and is still
available as "$>polaris", so the user experience is preserved.
The current state example:
Using sdk in python code: "from apache_polaris.sdk import catalog"
Using CLI tool in command line: >polaris --help
Regards, Artur.
On 19/11/2025 17:22, Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote:
Hi Yufei,
[...] we already passed the community vote that explicitly
covered both: renaming PyPI package name to apache-polaris. Keep the
existing Python module name: polaris.
Could you link this vote?
If you mean [1], it looks like it only covered the package name, but did
not include any decision on the module name.
The failed vote [2] was about using the name "pypolaris". That proposal was
rejected, I agree, but I do not think it means that "polaris" was
reconfirmed as a module name. From my POV, the "default" for a module name
is probably the package name.
Given that the vote and prior discussion were clear, do we want to reopen
this, or should we proceed with the agreed-upon names?
From my POV the existing state of the CLI code is good enough. Still, like
I said, I do not mind renaming the module again.
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/dspg27wmqzrr44z0o9t3pbwdb4jjjm40
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/rck38gl3g1x8m3tmtf24cvyn7tk0mn92
Cheers,
Dmitri.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 11:56 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Dmitri,
Yeah, it was a bit confusing, package names and module names can differ,
and in our case we already passed the community vote that explicitly
covered both: renaming PyPI package name to apache-polaris. Keep the
existing Python module name: polaris.
Given that the vote and prior discussion were clear, do we want to reopen
this, or should we proceed with the agreed-upon names?
I'd suggest to follow the existing vote/discussion and move forward with
publishing the Python CLI accordingly.
Yufei
On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:42 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi Yufei,
I personally think "apache_polaris" as a module name aligns well with
"apache-polaris" as a package name. IIRC, the use of the underscore is
necessary due to language syntax requirements.
TBH, I was initially confused with the vote thread [1] as I thought it
was
related to the CLI (shell) command name.
That said, if we want to rename the module back to "polaris", I would not
mind.
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/rck38gl3g1x8m3tmtf24cvyn7tk0mn92
Cheers,
Dmitri.
On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 3:43 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi folks,
I’d like to clarify the naming decisions for the Python CLI after
reviewing
the recent changes.
The PyPI package name change to apache-polaris is correct and fully
aligned
with the Apache distribution guidelines. Thanks Artur for making it
happen.
PR #2812 also changed the Python module/directory name to
apache_polaris,
which is not aligned with our community decision. As discussed[2] and
voted[1] on in the dev mailing list, we agreed to keep the module name
as
polaris to ensure import stability and compatibility with existing
integrations.
To summarize:
- PyPI package name: *apache-polaris* (correct and intended),
configured in pyproject.toml
- Python module name: should remain *polaris* (per mailing list
vote[1])
- PR #2812: unintentionally renamed the module to *apache_polaris*,
which we should revert or adjust.
Thanks everyone for the thoughtful discussion. Happy to help coordinate
the
follow-up fix.
1. https://lists.apache.org/thread/rck38gl3g1x8m3tmtf24cvyn7tk0mn92
2. https://lists.apache.org/thread/1hys0h3r83nnxsbfszrjgnnkfjpdf2k7
Yufei
