I'm in favour of merging parquet-format and parquet-mr but at the moment, I would not merge MR and CPP, development speeds and release cycles differ and thus it would be more an inconvenience to have them in the same repo.
Uwe On Thu, Aug 3, 2017, at 02:37 AM, Deepak Majeti wrote: > +1. I like the idea of a common repository as well. This will ease the > Java > and C++ interoperability. Currently, Java treats parquet files written by > C++ differently. > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1. In doing so we may want to rename the repository to apache/parquet > > to reflect the expanded scope. > > > > We could also discuss merging in the C++ implementation, though the > > main reservation I would have would be version numbers as we will > > likely be releasing parquet-cpp more frequently than parquet-java has > > been releasing since the implementation continues to evolve. If the > > Java folks are comfortable with more frequent releases (and we would > > want to add a document explaining the respective API stability of each > > component, e.g. C++ will be a bit less stable for a while) then this > > seems OK to me. > > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Nong Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'd like to propose retiring the parquet-format repo and moving the code > > > into > > > parquet-mr. Having the splits repos causes unnecessary complexity and > > > doesn't > > > seem to offer much benefit. For example: > > > 1. Making changes that require format changes and implementation is > > > split. Things > > > go out of sync. > > > 2. More release version/release process management > > > 3. More things to do and understand getting started > > > > > > I don't recall why it was originally split; probably an artifact of how > > it > > > was born. If > > > this makes sense, we can consider merging parquet-cpp as well. > > > > > > The specific proposal is to add a commit to parquet-format to indicate it > > > is moved > > > and merged into parquet-mr and move the current parquet-format files into > > > parquet-mr. > > > The next release of parquet-mr would release both, with the same version. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > Nong > > > > > > -- > regards, > Deepak Majeti
