>> From:Micah Kornfield
>> Send Time:2019年9月26日(星期四) 14:23
>> To:Neal Richardson
>> Cc:"Krisztián Szűcs" ; Wes McKinney <
>> wesmck...@gmail.com>; dev
>> Subject:Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 rel
>>> > > > > > > > >> > >>
> > >>>> > > > > > > > >> > > Sure, I'll be available next week. We can also
> > grant access
> > >>>> > > > to
> >
) 14:23
To:Neal Richardson
Cc:"Krisztián Szűcs" ; Wes McKinney
; dev
Subject:Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 release
Just an I've started the RC generation process off, the last commit from
master is [1]
I am currently waiting the crossbow builds (build-690 on
ursa-labs/crossbow). I
time consuming.
> >>>> > > > > > > > >> > >
> >>>> > > > > > > > >> > >>
> >>>> > > > > > > > >> > >> > Thanks,
>
>> > Micah
>>>> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
>>>> > > > > > > > >> > >> > [1]
>>>> > > > > > > > >> > >>
>>>> > > > >
>>&
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ARROW/Release+Management+Guide
>>> > > > > > > > >> > >> >
>>> > > > > > > > >> > >> > On Wed
; >> number of steps. Note that you need to add your
>> code
>> > > > > signing key to
>> > > > > > > > >> > >> >> the KEYS file in SVN (that's not very hard to
>> do). I
&
>> >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:55 PM Micah Kornfield <
> > > > > > > >> > >> emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > >> >> >
> > > > > > > >> > >> >> > SGTM, as well.
>
le RMs involved with
> producing the
> > > > > source and
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >> binary artifacts for the vote
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> > >> >> On Tue
gt; >> I have
> > > > > > >> > >> >> > a couple of concerns:
> > > > > > >> > >> >> > 1. In the past I've had trouble downloading and
> > > validating
> > > >
nd
> > validating
> > > > > >> > >> releases. I'm a
> > > > > >> > >> >> > bit worried, that I might have similar problems doing
> > the necessary
> > > > > >> > >> uploads.
> > > > > >&g
t; >> > >> uploads.
> > > > >> > >> >> > 2. My internet connection will likely be not great, I
> don't know if
> > > > >> > >> this
> > > > >> > >> >> > would make it even less likely to be succ
>> > >> this
> > > >> > >> >> > would make it even less likely to be successful.
> > > >> > >> >> >
> > > >> > >> >> > Does it become problematic if somehow I would have to
> > > >> > >> >>
I would have to abandon
> > >> > >> >> > the
> > >> > >> process
> > >> > >> >> > mid-release? Is there anyone who could serve as a backup?
> > >> > >> >> > Are the
>
t; >> >> >
> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:25 PM Neal Richardson <
> >> > >> neal.p.richard...@gmail.com>
> >> > >> >> > wrote:
> >> > >> >> >
> >> > >> >&g
> wrote:
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >> > > Sounds good to me.
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > Do we have a release manager yet? Any volunteers?
>> > >> >> > >
>> > &
; > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:06 PM Wes McKinney <
> wesmck...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > > hi all,
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> >
> >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > > hi all,
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > It looks like we're drawing close to be able to make the
> 0.15.0
> > >> >> > > > release. I would suggest "penc
ble to make the 0.15.0
> >> >> > > > release. I would suggest "pencils down" at the end of this week
> >> and
> >> >> > > > see if a release candidate can be produced next Monday September
> >> 23.
> >> >> >
ncils down" at the end of this week
>> and
>> >> > > > see if a release candidate can be produced next Monday September
>> 23.
>> >> > > > Any thoughts or objections?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks,
>> >> > > >
;> > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > hi Eric -- yes, that's correct. I'm planning to amend the
> Format docs
> >> > > > > today regarding the EOS issue and also update the C++ library
> >> > > > &g
; > > > > hi Eric -- yes, that's correct. I'm planning to amend the Format docs
>> > > > > today regarding the EOS issue and also update the C++ library
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:21 AM Eric Erhardt
>&g
t 11:21 AM Eric Erhardt
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I assume the plan is to merge the ARROW-6313-flatbuffer-alignment
> > > > branch into master before the 0.15 release, correct?
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > BTW - I believe the C# alignment changes are ready to be merged into
> > > the alignment branch - https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5280/
> > > > >
> > > > > Eric
> > > > >
> > > > > --
e merged into
> > the alignment branch - https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5280/
> > > >
> > > > Eric
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Micah Kornfield
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 10
release, correct?
> > >
> > > BTW - I believe the C# alignment changes are ready to be merged into
> the alignment branch - https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5280/
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > >
;
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Micah Kornfield
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 10:24 PM
> > To: Wes McKinney
> > Cc: dev ; niki.lj
> > Subject: Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 release
> >
> > I should have a little more bandwidth
0, 2019 10:24 PM
> To: Wes McKinney
> Cc: dev ; niki.lj
> Subject: Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 release
>
> I should have a little more bandwidth to help with some of the packaging
> starting tomorrow and going into the weekend.
>
> On Tuesday, September 10, 2019, Wes McKinney
: Micah Kornfield
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 10:24 PM
To: Wes McKinney
Cc: dev ; niki.lj
Subject: Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 release
I should have a little more bandwidth to help with some of the packaging
starting tomorrow and going into the weekend.
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019, Wes
t; JSON files[3]
>>> > > Java side code already checked in, other implementations seems not.
>>> > >
>>> > > iii. ARROW-6202: OutOfMemory in JdbcAdapter[4]
>>> > > Caused by trying to load all records in one contiguous batch, fixed
>>> by providing iterator API for iterati
> > > Caused by trying to load all records in one contiguous batch, fixed
>> by providing iterator API for iteratively reading in ARROW-6219[5].
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Ji Liu
>> > >
>> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ar
[2] https://arrow.apache.org/docs/ipc.html
> > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-1875
> > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6202[5]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6219
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
[2] https://arrow.apache.org/docs/ipc.html
> > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-1875
> > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6202[5]
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6219
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > From:Wes McKinney
> > Send T
ROW-1875
> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6202[5]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6219
>
>
>
> ------
> From:Wes McKinney
> Send Time:2019年8月19日(星期一) 23:03
> To:dev
> Subj
Time:2019年8月19日(星期一) 23:03
To:dev
Subject:Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 release
I'm going to work some on organizing the 0.15.0 backlog some this
week, if anyone wants to help with grooming (particularly for
languages other than C++/Python where I'm focusing) that would be
helpful. There have b
I'm going to work some on organizing the 0.15.0 backlog some this
week, if anyone wants to help with grooming (particularly for
languages other than C++/Python where I'm focusing) that would be
helpful. There have been almost 500 JIRA issues opened since the
0.14.0 release, so we should make sure t
The Windows wheel issue in 0.14.1 seems to be
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6015
I think the root cause could be the Windows changes in
https://github.com/apache/arrow/commit/223ae744cc2a12c60cecb5db593263a03c13f85a
I would be appreciative if a volunteer would look into what was w
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 11:17:07 -0700
Micah Kornfield wrote:
> >
> > In C++ they are
> > independent, we could have 32-bit array lengths and variable-length
> > types with 64-bit offsets if we wanted (we just wouldn't be able to
> > have a List child with more than INT32_MAX elements).
>
> I think
>
> In C++ they are
> independent, we could have 32-bit array lengths and variable-length
> types with 64-bit offsets if we wanted (we just wouldn't be able to
> have a List child with more than INT32_MAX elements).
I think the point is we could do this in C++ but we don't. I'm not sure we
would
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:00 AM Micah Kornfield wrote:
>
> Hi Wes,
> >
> > Do these need to be dependent on the 64-bit array length discussion?
>
> We could hack something that can read the lower 32-bit range, so I guess
> not, but this leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I think there is likely
> s
Hi Wes,
>
> Do these need to be dependent on the 64-bit array length discussion?
We could hack something that can read the lower 32-bit range, so I guess
not, but this leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I think there is likely
still enough time to have the discussion and get these implemented, one w
Agreed with Wes.
Regards
Antoine.
Le 14/08/2019 à 20:30, Wes McKinney a écrit :
> For the record, I don't think we should hold a major release hostage
> if we aren't able to complete various feature milestones in time.
> Since it's been about 5-6 weeks since 0.14.0 we're coming close to the
>
For the record, I don't think we should hold a major release hostage
if we aren't able to complete various feature milestones in time.
Since it's been about 5-6 weeks since 0.14.0 we're coming close to the
desired 8-10 week timeline for major releases, so if we need to have
0.16.0 prior to 1.0.0, I
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 11:43 AM Micah Kornfield wrote:
>
> >
> > is there anything else that has come up that
> > definitely needs to happen before we can release again?
>
> We need to decide on a way forward for LargeList, LargeBinary, etc, types...
>
Do these need to be dependent on the 64-bi
>
> is there anything else that has come up that
> definitely needs to happen before we can release again?
We need to decide on a way forward for LargeList, LargeBinary, etc, types...
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 8:27 PM Wes McKinney wrote:
> hi folks,
>
> Since there have been a number of fairly s
Is there a JIRA for the issue that caused us to pull the 0.14.1
Windows Python wheel installers? If we want to have working wheels for
0.15.0 we'll need a volunteer to help address whatever was wrong with
0.14.1.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 10:26 PM Wes McKinney wrote:
>
> hi folks,
>
> Since there h
hi folks,
Since there have been a number of fairly serious issues (e.g.
ARROW-6060) since 0.14.1 that have been fixed I think we should start
planning of the next major release. Note that we still have some
format-related work (the Flatbuffers alignment issue) that ought to be
resolved (not a smal
47 matches
Mail list logo
