[DISCUSS][C#][GLib] Formalize use of the GLib libraries for native library bindings

Hi everyone, The .NET/C# Apache Arrow library currently only contains managed code, but the addition of the C Data Interface implementation opens up the ability to easily add bindings to the C++ Arrow library to add more capabilities. There is currently a draft PR open to add bindings to the Acero

Re: [VOTE][Julia] Release Apache Arrow Julia 2.7.2 RC1

+1 (binding) I ran the following command line on Debian GNU/Linux sid: VERIFY_FORCE_USE_JULIA_BINARY=1 dev/release/verify_rc.sh 2.7.2 1 Thanks, -- kou In <20240507.071130.179022350445947753@clear-code.com> "[VOTE][Julia] Release Apache Arrow Julia 2.7.2 RC1" on Tue, 07 May 2024 07:11

Re: [VOTE][Julia] Release Apache Arrow Julia 2.7.2 RC1

+1, tested on m3 macos On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 4:11 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote: > Hi, > > Note that we already published this version to the official > registry of general Julia packages[1] accidentally[2] but I > would like to start a vote for this version to satisfy the > ASF's release policy[3]. >

[VOTE][Julia] Release Apache Arrow Julia 2.7.2 RC1

Hi, Note that we already published this version to the official registry of general Julia packages[1] accidentally[2] but I would like to start a vote for this version to satisfy the ASF's release policy[3]. I would like to propose the following release candidate (RC1) of Apache Arrow Julia vers

Re: Upgrading Java version in build toolchain

I wanted to share some status updates: I do have a list of changes to build Arrow with a recent version of Java using the `--release` plugin option of javac. The full change is available at: https://github.com/laurentgo/arrow/pull/3 Here are roughly how the changes are divided: * Change access to

Re: [VOTE][Format] UUID canonical extension type

+1 On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 4:03 PM Antoine Pitrou wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > Le 19/04/2024 à 22:22, Rok Mihevc a écrit : > > Hi all, > > > > Following initial requests [1][2] and recent tangential ML discussion > [3] I > > would like to propose a vote to add language for UUID canonical extensio

Re: [VOTE][Format] JSON canonical extension type

+1 On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 4:03 PM Antoine Pitrou wrote: > +1 (binding) for the current proposal, i.e. with the RFC 8289 > requirement and the 3 current String types allowed. > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > Le 30/04/2024 à 19:26, Rok Mihevc a écrit : > > Hi all, thanks for the votes and comments