Thank you Jacob for bringing this up! I am also in favor of decoupling
versions (provided that the release managers are also in favor of
this, since their time is required to implement this and because the
ongoing consequences of separate releases disproportionately affects
them).
Part of the vote
[Note: You're receiving this email because you are subscribed to one
or more project dev@ mailing lists at the Apache Software Foundation.]
Dear community,
We hope you are doing great, are you ready for Community Over Code EU?
Check out the featured sessions, get your tickets with special
discoun
Hi everyone,
As part of The ASF’s 25th anniversary campaign[1], we will be celebrating
projects and communities in multiple ways.
We invite all projects and contributors to participate in the following
ways:
* Individuals - submit your first contribution:
https://news.apache.org/foundation/entry
Yes, correct for language features. My point was more that we can
decide on a major Arrow version upgrading the target language version.
That's what I meant by "consensus".
Regards
JB
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 5:55 PM Laurent Goujon
wrote:
>
> At code level we need to separate language features fro
Hello,
I would like to propose a change to the ADBC specification that introduces
5 new standard info codes and formalizes 3 existing option keys.
The info codes being introduced are:
- ADBC_INFO_VENDOR_READ_ONLY 3
- ADBC_INFO_VENDOR_SQL 4
- ADBC_INFO_VENDOR_SUBSTRAIT 5
- ADBC_INFO_VENDOR_SUBSTRA
