+1
I ran the followings on Debian GNU/Linux sid:
* TEST_GO=0 \
TEST_INTEGRATION_GO=0 \
LANG=C \
TZ=UTC \
ARROW_CMAKE_OPTIONS="-DBoost_NO_BOOST_CMAKE=ON" \
CUDA_TOOLKIT_ROOT=/usr \
dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh source 5.0.0 1
* LANG=C dev/release/v
Thanks. I went ahead and did that.
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 6:53 PM Mauricio Vargas
wrote:
>
> I think that a 2nd commit + push with the reverse shall be the best fix
>
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 12:41 AM Weston Pace wrote:
>
> > Well it did not take long for me to make a mistake. I accidentally
I think that a 2nd commit + push with the reverse shall be the best fix
On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 12:41 AM Weston Pace wrote:
> Well it did not take long for me to make a mistake. I accidentally
> pushed a commit to master instead of my remote when creating a PR.
> What is the best way to remedy
Well it did not take long for me to make a mistake. I accidentally
pushed a commit to master instead of my remote when creating a PR.
What is the best way to remedy this? Push a revert? Since it is
protected I cannot force push to reset back to where it was (not that
I would necessarily want to d
In flight.proto [1] it states that the encoded bytes are as described in
the flatbuffer schema.
```
/*
* Wrap the result of a getSchema call
*/
message SchemaResult {
// schema of the dataset as described in Schema.fbs::Schema.
bytes schema = 1;
}
```
However, both this schema and the schem
Does anyone want to make a DataFusion / Ballista official release (and then
subsequent release to crates.io)? There is now a ticket [1] to track this
work. I think it would be great to do if someone has time. There are all
sorts of great features that have gone in since 4.0.0
I don't have much ti
Alright in light of this I'll rewrite that PR to a traits based approach.
Thanks all
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 9:12 AM Wes McKinney wrote:
> Like Antoine, I am not sure how comfortable I am with this the way it
> is now. On one hand I see the benefits in the reduction of
> boilerplate. On the othe
Like Antoine, I am not sure how comfortable I am with this the way it
is now. On one hand I see the benefits in the reduction of
boilerplate. On the other, making the code more "magical" through meta
constructs likely makes it less accessible to contributors. It also
makes it so that IDEs (Clion, V
Hi,
I recently encountered the fact that the .getField() method of NullVector
returns a Field with a hardcoded name.
https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/apache-arrow-5.0.0/java/vector/src/main/java/org/apache/arrow/vector/NullVector.java#L66
This is currently hardcoded to
public static fin
