[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-187?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15271904#comment-15271904
]
Micah Kornfield commented on ARROW-187:
---
I don't think the allocations are expensive
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-106?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15271897#comment-15271897
]
Micah Kornfield commented on ARROW-106:
---
Per discussion on ML we are going to remove
Admittedly, coming from the complete opposite end of the commit-size spectrum,
the JIRA issue + GitHub pull request workflow already feels a little frictional
for simple bugfixes and additions, so I was wary of Gerrit. But it actually
looks pretty well-suited to small commits.
One advantage I'd
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> I dont know about the other pmc members and committers but I prefer just
> making Gerrit the only way to submit patches rather than one of many. It
> seems to work well for Asterix and Kudu.
>
I'd say go for it. Can always undo if it prove
I'm also on board with this if it doesn't deter new contributors (it's
a bit of additional process over GitHub but overall not too hard to
learn).
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> I dont know about the other pmc members and committers but I prefer just
> making Gerrit the o
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-187?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15270995#comment-15270995
]
Wes McKinney commented on ARROW-187:
Good point. I don't have enough experience to know
