Hi, Sorry. I was wrong. I tried it locally and got no build error. We added "deprecated" metadata in this case. So I thought that we get some deprecated warnings and they are treated as errors in CI.
> At worse, you can include the changes necessary for it to compile > cleanly, without adding support for the new fields/methods? Why do we want to split format/ changes even when we require additional changes? Easy to review? I can understand that we can review specification changes without implementations. But some problems may be found by implementing the specification changes. I think that this is the reason why we require at least two reference implementations to change our specifications. So I think that we should not split specification changes and their implementations without a reasonable reason. If we should review/merge specification changes and then review/merge their implementations, how about updating our changing process? https://arrow.apache.org/docs/dev/format/Changing.html Thanks, -- kou In <e4176e1a-fa85-453d-7a00-279044c3f...@python.org> "Re: [DISCUSS][Format][Flight] Result set expiration support" on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 08:55:33 +0200, Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > Doesn't protobuf ensure forwards compatibility? Why would it break? > > At worse, you can include the changes necessary for it to compile > cleanly, without adding support for the new fields/methods? > > > Le 22/06/2023 à 02:16, Sutou Kouhei a écrit : >> Hi, >> The following part in the original e-mail is the one: >> >>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/36009 is an >>> implementation of this proposal. The pull requests has the >>> followings: >>> >>> 1. Format changes: >>> * format/Flight.proto >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/36009/files#diff-53b6c132dcc789483c879f667a1c675792b77aae9a056b257d6b20287bb09dba >>> * format/FlightSql.proto >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/36009/files#diff-fd4e5266a841a2b4196aadca76a4563b6770c91d400ee53b6235b96da628a01e >>> >>> 2. Documentation changes: >>> docs/source/format/Flight.rst >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/36009/files#diff-839518fb41e923de682e8587f0b6fdb00eb8f3361d360c2f7249284a136a7d89 >> We can split the part to a separated pull request. But if we >> split the part and merge the pull requests for format >> related changes and implementation related changes >> separately, our CI will be broken temporary. Because our >> implementations use auto-generated sources that are based on >> *.proto. >> Thanks,
