alamb commented on PR #34: URL: https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/34#issuecomment-2152291093
> > I think it would also help to define what is required of an implementation to have a "check" in the corresponding feature row. > > I worry about this becoming a little bit of a pedantic discussion. My 2 cents: I think a reasonable approach is to let maintainers decide on checking the box or not. Maybe we can have a ternary value. If a maintainer feels it is fully supported it is a check. If they think reasonable people might be confused it gets '-' or check without footnote to explain the exception. If it is completely not supported it gets an 'X'. We can always adjust criteria as we get feedback. I agree that it would be best to start with a relatively lax, low barrier to entry for self reporting Over time we can add more stringency (ideally with automated checks) if/when that would add value -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@parquet.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
