+1 (binding)

On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 4:10 AM vin jake <jakevin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1, It's reasonable
>
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 9:56 PM Andy Grove <andygrov...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would like to propose that we move the Ballista project to a new
> > top-level *arrow-ballista* repository.
> >
> > The rationale for this (copied from the GitHub issue [1]) is:
> >
> >    -
> >
> >    Decouple release process for DataFusion and Ballista
> >    -
> >
> >    Allow each project to have top-level documentation and user guides that
> >    are targeting the appropriate audience
> >    -
> >
> >    Reduce issue tracking and PR review burden for DataFusion maintainers
> >    who are not as interested in Ballista
> >    -
> >
> >    Help avoid accidental circular dependencies being introduced between the
> >    projects (such as [3])
> >    -
> >
> >    Helps formalize the public API for DataFusion that other query engines
> >    should be using
> >
> > There is a design docment [3] that outlines the plan for implementing this.
> >
> > Only votes from PMC members are binding, but all members of the community
> > are encouraged to test the release and vote with "(non-binding)". The vote
> > will run for at least 72 hours.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Proceed with moving Ballista to a new arrow-ballista repository [ ]
> > +0
> >
> > [ ] -1 Do not proceed with moving Ballista to a new arrow-ballista
> > repository because ...
> >
> > Here is my vote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/issues/2502
> >
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/issues/2433
> >
> > [3]
> >
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jNRbadyStSrV5kifwn0khufAwq6OnzGczG4z8oTQJP4/edit?usp=sharing
> >

Reply via email to