GitHub user yangdanny97 added a comment to the discussion: A new home for pyarrow-stubs?
Thanks for the context! If there isn't a strong consensus on inline types, I'd probably recommend the types be kept as stubs (with some tools like [stubtest](https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/stubtest.html) to make sure they're complete and in-sync). The reason is that if you change your mind, it's easier to move from stubs to inline types, whereas removing inline types will cause a lot of churn and merge conflicts. Hand-written stubs will be much better quality than completely auto-generated stubs, and to the best of my knowledge all existing stub-generation tools do not produce stubs that are good enough to be used out-of-the-box without manual tweaks. Almost all the stubs in typeshed are maintained by hand, with a few exceptions like protobuf which has its own stub generation script. I can see generated stubs being used as a temporary supplement to fill any gaps that pyarrow-stubs has (according to the author it's relatively complete), but after being generated the stubs will need to be fixed and maintained by hand. GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/arrow/discussions/45919#discussioncomment-12622499 ---- This is an automatically sent email for user@arrow.apache.org. To unsubscribe, please send an email to: user-unsubscr...@arrow.apache.org
