eskabetxe commented on issue #12632:
URL: https://github.com/apache/gravitino/issues/12632#issuecomment-5427354910

   @jerryshao yes, I think I could make only 3, doing less will need a lot of 
work and reflection to allow the different SPI contracts..
   
   Current proposal | Trino versions | Why it's separate
   -- | -- | --
   trino-connector-479-479 | 479 | JDK 25 cutover (478→479); SPI identical to 
478
   trino-connector-480-480 | 480 | ColumnMetadata.getComment() → Optional, 
SchemaFunctionName record accessors
   trino-connector-481-481 | 481 | finishTableExecute return type void → 
Map<String,Long>
   trino-connector-482-483 | 482-483 | split/read/write SPI rework (getSplits, 
getNextBatch, page source/sink, Constraint, TypeSignature removed); 482 ≡ 483
   
   
   I could do
   
   New proposal | Trino versions | Notes
   -- | -- | --
   trino-connector-479-480 | 479-480 | merge of 479 + 480
   trino-connector-481-481 | 481 | unchanged
   trino-connector-482-483 | 482-483 | unchanged
   
   I can add to the current PR all changes, so we can discuss it better..
   I already have all implementations in local, is more about the decision of 
how we group the changes and what I need to do after that.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to