Wes, We talked about nightlies and downstream dependencies and I just want to be clear I'm understanding what you are suggesting. Apologies if I'm being a bit slow.
I think we are in agreement that nightlies make sense for now because things are moving fast and this Rust library is very new. I can build nightly releases myself, but if I publish those to crates.io, they should be under a separate name and not using the "arrow" crate that I established for this project on crates.io Is that correct? Thanks, Andy. On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 6:29 PM, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Andy, > > You're free to do whatever you like outside of Apache infrastructure -- I > don't think we can have the apache/arrow Travis publishing artifacts to > crates.io, though. > > If you want to have some scripts in the repo to help with creating > nightlies, that's totally fine, but this isn't something that the PMC is > able to do anything about formally. We documented our nightly build tool > for Python here > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/master/python/doc/ > source/development.rst#nightly-builds-of-arrow-cpp- > parquet-cpp-and-pyarrow-for-linux > > - Wes > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018, 7:13 PM Andy Grove <andygrov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Wes, > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > A nightly release sounds appealing in these early days. Technically, I > > assume this is just a case of configuring travis to update the minor > > version number and run a "cargo publish" on master once per day (if there > > are changes)? > > > > From a process point of view, what is involved in deciding whether to do > > this or not? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andy. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > hi Andy, > > > > > > > My argument for doing this is that although other Rust developers can > > > set up a github dependency in their Cargo,toml, this just isn't a > natural > > > way to work in Rust so we are making it hard for people to experiment > > with > > > Arrow. > > > > > > Being penalized by the language for not using a centralized package > > > repository seems odd to me, but if that's the way Rust is, then so be > > > it. > > > > > > > 1. Is it ok for me to push updated releases to crates.io? > > > > > > If crates.io definitely needs to get updated as frequently as you are > > > saying, we should make separate Rust releases and hold votes like we > > > have with JavaScript. It sounds like nightlies or downstream > > > "releases" would be a better solution while the project is new / in > > > flux, see below: > > > > > > > 2. Is releasing from a fork of the code (under a different name) > > > acceptable? > > > > > > Sure, you can make your own "downstream" releases of the project, as > > > long as they aren't advertised as being releases made by the Apache > > > project. Some of us have been building nightly Python packages for > > > development purposes > > > > > > - Wes > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Andy Grove <andygrov...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I've been creating some frustrations for myself this week because I'm > > not > > > > sure how to work efficiently now that the Rust version of Apache > Arrow > > is > > > > in the official Apache repo. > > > > > > > > It seems I have two conflicting requirements: > > > > > > > > 1. I want Apache Arrow [Rust] to be a community-driven high quality > > piece > > > > of software built by many contributors, with a thoughtful code review > > > > process. > > > > > > > > 2. I want to move fast and innovate on my other open source project > > which > > > > now depends on Arrow, and I want to help other projects (such as > > > > https://github.com/sunchao/parquet-rs) integrate with Arrow. > > > > > > > > I have two questions that I need guidance on: > > > > > > > > 1. Is it ok for me to push updated releases to crates.io? > > > > > > > > We currently have a 0.1.0 release of the Rust library in crates.io ( > > > > https://crates.io/crates/arrow) which was made to reserve the Arrow > > name > > > > there (with approval from Wes). The github repo has changed quite a > bit > > > > since this release but this is the only version that Rust users can > > > easily > > > > pull into their projects as a versioned dependency. Understanding > that > > > this > > > > isn't an official Apache release since it hasn't been through a > release > > > > process, is it OK to push new versions of this unofficial release as > > PRs > > > > are accepted into the repo? I have the *ability* to do this but I > don't > > > > know if I have *approval* to do this. > > > > > > > > My argument for doing this is that although other Rust developers can > > set > > > > up a github dependency in their Cargo,toml, this just isn't a natural > > way > > > > to work in Rust so we are making it hard for people to experiment > with > > > > Arrow. The code is available in github and anyone could fork the code > > and > > > > make their own release to crates.io but I'd prefer them to use the > one > > > we > > > > make. > > > > > > > > 2. Is releasing from a fork of the code (under a different name) > > > acceptable? > > > > > > > > We cannot stop people forking the Arrow repo and making their own > > > releases > > > > to crates.io under a different name. > > > > > > > > I'm wondering if I should just do that for now e.g. release a > > > > "datafusion-arrow" project from the branch in my fork where I have > > merged > > > > all of my PRs. This way I can keep moving fast and if other projects > > such > > > > as parquet-rs want to depend on my releases as a temporary measure, > > they > > > > can, until the official Arrow crate catches up. This would fix my > short > > > > term pains but I don't want to detract from the official project. > > > > > > > > I'd appreciate some guidance on the best way forward. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Andy. > > > > > >
