I'd love to have the project hosted under the the official avro repository and gain help from people who know Avro far better than me.
I'll take some time to re-learn the existing avro API and try to guestimate the effort involved in wrapping the current fastavro codebase with it. However I have a hunch we won't be 100% backward compatible and will need some phase-out period (of course - I might be wrong :) On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > sounds great to me. > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > Right now, we have two python implementations: py and py3. And there is > also > > fastavro [1], which is popular because it is fast and more pythonic. It > also > > works with python 2.7, python 3.x, pypy, and can be sped up by cython. > > > > I had a recent e-mail exchange with Miki Tebeka, the creator and > maintainer > > of fastavro, about the current python Avro implementations and he's > > interested in working with the Apache community to merge the existing > > implementations into one. I'm really excited about it, since this is a > great > > opportunity to grow the Avro community and consolidate the python > > implementations. > > > > I'd like to start a discussion from this thread about next steps. I think > > the best way forward is to bring fastavro in, and then work on building > > compatibility with the current APIs where we need to so that we can > > deprecate the existing py and py3 projects. > > > > Does that sound reasonable? > > > > rb > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/tebeka/fastavro > > > > -- > > Ryan Blue > > Software Engineer > > Cloudera, Inc. > > > > -- > Sean >
