The message types defined in FlightSql.proto are all marked experimental as well. Would this include changes to any of those?
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 16:43 Laurent Goujon <laur...@dremio.com.invalid> wrote: > we have been using it with Dremio for a while now, and we consider it > stable > > +1 (not binding) > > Laurent > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 4:52 PM Matt Topol <m...@voltrondata.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > +1, I agree with everyone else > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 7:49 PM James Duong > > <james.du...@improving.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > +1 from me. It's used in a good number of databases now. > > > > > > Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> > > > ________________________________ > > > From: David Li <lidav...@apache.org> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2023 9:59:54 AM > > > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org> > > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Flight SQL as experimental > > > > > > Flight SQL has been marked 'experimental' since the beginning. Given > that > > > it's now used by a few systems for a few years now, should we remove > this > > > qualifier? I don't expect us to be making breaking changes anymore. > > > > > > This came up in a GitHub PR: > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/39040 > > > > > > -David > > > > > >
