Hi Micah, I wanted to open this vote to get official alignment on where the Spark community wants to move the Variant spec and implementation. There are several potential projects we could move Variant to, so getting this high-level agreement for the new home is helpful. I see this vote for deciding on the direction of the move (which project to move to), and not deciding on the mechanisms or process of the move.
The details and implications of the actual move are not finalized, and are currently work in progress, and will be shared in the near future. Thanks, Gene On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 10:28 AM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think maybe we should finalize the details before having a vote, to make > sure everyone understands the implications? > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 9:12 AM Gene Pang <gene.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> In general, the Iceberg community is in favor of moving it to Parquet, >> and the Parquet community is in support of receiving Variant. The details >> are not fully figured out, but there is high-level alignment in moving it >> to Parquet. >> >> Thanks, >> Gene >> >> On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 2:17 PM Mridul Muralidharan <mri...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> What was the conclusions of discussions with Parquet and Iceberg >>> communities on this ? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Mridul >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 12:48 PM Gene Pang <gene.p...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I’d like to start a vote for moving the Variant specification and >>>> library to the Parquet project. This allows the Variant binary format and >>>> shredding format to be more widely used by other interested projects and >>>> systems. >>>> >>>> Please refer to the discussion thread: >>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/0k5oj3mn0049fcxoxm3gx3d7r28gw4rj >>>> >>>> This vote will be open for the next 72 hours >>>> >>>> [ ] +1: Accept the proposal >>>> [ ] +0 >>>> [ ] -1: I don’t think this is a good idea because … >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Gene >>>> >>>
