Hi Ian, Thanks for your action on the PR!
-- kou In <CABCGCVfnEP7VPYd=KHEOX=ra3xwy+twbpj8mgk2qonxmj_2...@mail.gmail.com> "Re: [DISCUSS][Gandiva] changes in bundled double-conversion" on Mon, 1 May 2023 19:01:31 -0400, Ian Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kou, > > Thank you. I think this is a reasonable approach. > > I added a comment asking if the PR author can please update the PR by > porting the changes from PR #9816. > > After that is done, it should be easier to create a PR to upstream > double-conversion repo to propose these changes. > > Thanks, > Ian > > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 5:24 PM Sutou Kouhei <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> > Looking at PR #9816 which is the PR that introduced downstream changes >> > to our vendored copy of double-conversion, it appears that the changes >> > were quite small: two files modified, fewer than 10 lines of added >> > code, plus some comments [1]. If this is correct >> > ... >> > [1] >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9816/files#diff-d1cc5b70a5e980626bb70ae604a050d3393ac25a717a5a4c8dc40e8b5caf4b05R97-R105 >> >> Correct. >> >> > then I think the easiest path forward for everyone might >> > be to port these small changes to the updated vendored >> > copy of double-conversion while we await possible addition >> > of these changes to upstream double-conversion. >> >> I'm OK with maintaining our changes ONLY WHILE we're >> discussing our changes with upstream. >> >> Does anyone want to upstream our changes? It seems that our >> changes break a compatibility. So I think that we need to >> explain our use-case to upstream. >> >> >> Thanks, >> -- >> kou >> >> In <CABCGCVcN+5gUv=bMB_2qUcXPDGW70TzaTHKhYhpkO-0aPQSe=q...@mail.gmail.com> >> "Re: [DISCUSS][Gandiva] changes in bundled double-conversion" on Mon, 1 >> May 2023 13:06:27 -0400, >> Ian Cook <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Looking at PR #9816 which is the PR that introduced downstream changes >> > to our vendored copy of double-conversion, it appears that the changes >> > were quite small: two files modified, fewer than 10 lines of added >> > code, plus some comments [1]. If this is correct, then I think the >> > easiest path forward for everyone might be to port these small changes >> > to the updated vendored copy of double-conversion while we await >> > possible addition of these changes to upstream double-conversion. >> > >> > Ian >> > >> > [1] >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9816/files#diff-d1cc5b70a5e980626bb70ae604a050d3393ac25a717a5a4c8dc40e8b5caf4b05R97-R105 >> > >> > On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 9:27 PM Sutou Kouhei <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Gandiva developers, >> >> >> >> Could you reply this? >> >> >> >> If no Gandiva developers reply this, I'll remove these >> >> changes next week. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- >> >> kou >> >> >> >> In <[email protected]> >> >> "[DISCUSS][Gandiva] changes in bundled double-conversion" on Thu, 20 >> >> Apr 2023 17:15:28 +0900 (JST), >> >> Sutou Kouhei <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Hi Gandiva developers, >> >> > >> >> > We're updating bundled double-conversion: >> >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/34919 >> >> > >> >> > I noticed that our bundled double-conversion has our changes >> >> > introduced by https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9816 . >> >> > >> >> > I want Gandiva developers to upstream these changes instead >> >> > of maintaining our changes in apache/arrow for easy to >> >> > maintain and sharing improvements to all over the world like >> >> > Apache Arrow. >> >> > >> >> > If no Gandiva developer join this discussion, I want to >> >> > remove these changes. >> >> > >> >> > See also: >> >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/34919#issuecomment-1501420706 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> >> > -- >> >> > kou
