Sounds good to me. I am opening a JIRA to support Decimal Values. It should be a straightforward extension to FLBA with the additional requirement of swapping the bytes.
On 02/23/2016 11:35 AM, Wes McKinney wrote: 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]<mailto:[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 <<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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 > -- -- Deepak Majeti
