It looks like we should be able to clear our current patch queue today which puts us in very good shape for the 0.1 release.
I am planning to complete the dictionary encoding patches (PARQUET-493/494) by end of day tomorrow, so when those are done we should go into code scrubbing / bug fix mode unless there are any other major functional requirements that we are missing? - Wes On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote: > I'll be available most of today and tomorrow as needed for code > reviews. We need to try to get the outstanding patch queue all to +1 > this weekend so we are all unblocked to finish up the rest of the > items. > > If anyone needs me to take over any patches or JIRAs that you have > assigned please let me know. > > Thanks > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Majeti, Deepak <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Sounds good to me. > > > > On 02/20/2016 12:41 AM, Wes McKinney wrote: > >> hello again, > >> > >> We are making good progress. Once the outstanding patches are done we > >> are basically down to: > >> > >> - Outstanding blocker bug fixes > >> - Dictionary encoding (I will take care of this) > >> - Test coverage for failure modes (malformed files) > >> - Organizing the public API > >> - Miscellaneous unit test coverage (we can use the code coverage > >> report as our guide > >> https://coveralls.io/github/apache/parquet-cpp?branch=master) > >> - Codebase scrubbing (compiler flags and signed/unsigned types -- I > >> will do this toward the end of the release) > >> > >> I'd like to be done with the JIRAs we have scoped right now roughly > >> this time next week, and spend a few more days on code tidying, adding > >> some example scripts and general use / hardening before we cut the > >> release. Sound good? > >> > >> Thanks > >> Wes > >> > >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Thanks all. > >>> > >>> I'm gonna try to split the JIRAs into tracks so we can avoid working > >>> on patches in a suboptimal order. For example, many JIRAs cannot be > >>> completed until PARQUET-499 is done (Scanner tests and dictionary > >>> encoding rely on PLAIN encoding for all Parquet types). > >>> > >>> - Wes > >>> > >>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Majeti, Deepak <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> This looks good to me as well. > >>>> With little more effort towards testing, March 1 should be a doable > target. > >>>> > >>>> On 02/15/2016 07:11 PM, Julien Le Dem wrote: > >>>>> Looks good. I commented in the doc > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Aliaksei Sandryhaila < > [email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> The list looks reasonable. I've added PARQUET-530 to add support > for LZO > >>>>>> compression. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Not sure we'll be able to get everything done by March 1, but it's > a good > >>>>>> target. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 02/13/2016 12:32 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Dear friends, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I made a pass through the JIRAs and feature roadmap and listed out > >>>>>>> essential tasks for reaching a milestone that would merit a > versioned > >>>>>>> code release, see: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WyquzupLc3UkErO2OhqLJNQ9a84Cccc8LVUSuLQz39o/edit# > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I will be pressing for all of this to be completed with target date > >>>>>>> (for a parquet-cpp 0.1 RC) of March 1. I think with the current > >>>>>>> cadence and progress this should be achievable. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It would be great if Aliaksei, Deepak, Julien, and Nong could > briefly > >>>>>>> review the items and let me know if there are any blind spots / > things > >>>>>>> we've missed? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If we agree on the scope of the release and timeline, we should > create > >>>>>>> ordered "tracks" of interrelated JIRAs as many of them depend on > the > >>>>>>> others for functionality and unit test tools that will be created. > >>>>>>> This will reduce ambiguity about what needs doing next and reduce > >>>>>>> refactor churn / merge conflicts. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thank you > >>>>>>> Wes > >>>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> -- > >>>> Deepak Majeti > >>>> > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Deepak Majeti > > >
