Hi Everyone, Julien and I talked offline and I made some updates based on the conversation (I don't believe anything substantive, but there is more balanced language on encouraging people who can to adopt features sooner without any specific timelines attached).
Thanks, Micah On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 9:56 AM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > For example, there is still discussion about enabling >> new forward incompatible features by default and the role of major >> releases regarding that. > > Hi Julien, > > As written the specification does not require a major version release, > this is a suggestion for implementations to advertise possible > compatibility issues. > > Are there more points to discuss? Maybe we can pause this vote and try to > discuss it on the mailing list first. Given the wide range of input from > people across multiple time-zones, I'm not sure we will easily come to a > consensus without a discussion here anyways. > > I think everyone that had concerns about some of the more controversial > points has already voted for adoption. The one significant topic that has > come up since votes, is whether new logical types that are considered > forward compatible are not (as a strawman I put in that they should be > considered forward compatible, but maybe we can punt on this and add a > follow-up). > > Concretely, if there is current content that you strongly object to, I'd > prefer to remove it (or change from a required to suggestion) so we can get > something merged and have another round of conversations to refine as there > is already a lot of content in the PRs. > > Thanks, > Micah > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 3:23 PM Julien Le Dem <jul...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hello all. >> I have finally done a proper review on this great proposal by Micah. >> I have not been too available last month as I was half on vacation and >> half >> travelling for work. >> I am now back home and have more time. >> >> I do think that there are a few points we need to discuss to get to a >> crisper consensus on. For example, there is still discussion about >> enabling >> new forward incompatible features by default and the role of major >> releases regarding that. >> I think once we finalize that, we can merge it. >> My opinion is we should take advantage of the parquet sync to speed up >> converging. I'll follow up on the other thread to set it up. >> >> There is a discussion of having more frequent intermediary releases. I >> think there is consensus on that and we don't need to wait for this PR to >> be finished to act on it. >> >> Micah, thanks again for your effort and contribution. Does that sound like >> a reasonable next step to you? >> Best >> Julien >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 9:53 AM Julien Le Dem <jul...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > FYI, I am working on commenting on the PR and should be able to finish >> > today (PT). >> > Overall I think this is good and I am making suggestions along the way. >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 10:50 PM Julien Le Dem <jul...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > >> >> I started looking today but haven’t had time to finish. >> >> Let me get back to y’all soon. >> >> Best >> >> Julien >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 13:06 Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> It looks like we only have 2 +1 votes from PMC members so far. I >> would >> >>> appreciate it if another PMC member could review and cast a vote? >> >>> >> >>> Thanks, >> >>> Micah >> >>> >> >>> On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 7:37 AM Uwe L. Korn <uw...@xhochy.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > +1 (binding) >> >>> > >> >>> > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024, at 7:59 PM, Edward Seidl wrote: >> >>> > > +1 (non-binding) >> >>> > > >> >>> > > Thanks Micah! >> >>> > > Ed >> >>> > > >> >>> > > From: Vinoo Ganesh <vinoo.gan...@gmail.com> >> >>> > > Date: Thursday, July 4, 2024 at 6:19 AM >> >>> > > To: dev@parquet.apache.org <dev@parquet.apache.org> >> >>> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Adopt proposal on new features for >> parquet-format >> >>> > > and release for Parquet Java >> >>> > > +1 (non-binding) >> >>> > > >> >>> > > Thank you Micah for all of your work on this! >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > <vinoo.gan...@gmail.com> >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 5:28 AM Andrew Lamb < >> andrewlam...@gmail.com> >> >>> > wrote: >> >>> > > >> >>> > >> +1 (non binding) >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> Thank you Micah for all the effort you have put into gathering >> >>> feedback >> >>> > and >> >>> > >> building consensus >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> Andrew >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 2:48 AM Alkis Evlogimenos >> >>> > >> <alkis.evlogime...@databricks.com.invalid> wrote: >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> > +1 this is great, it puts a lot of clarity in the process. >> >>> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> >>> > >> > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 4:26 AM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> > >> > >> >>> > >> > > Generally +1 on the proposal. Thanks for finalizing it! >> >>> > >> > > >> >>> > >> > > I have left a comment regarding the next major release of >> >>> > parquet-java. >> >>> > >> > > >> >>> > >> > > Best, >> >>> > >> > > Gang >> >>> > >> > > >> >>> > >> > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 1:55 AM Micah Kornfield < >> >>> > emkornfi...@gmail.com> >> >>> > >> > > wrote: >> >>> > >> > > >> >>> > >> > > > This vote is whether to adopt and merge [1][2] a proposal >> for >> >>> > >> providing >> >>> > >> > > > formal guidance on new features are added to the Parquet >> >>> format, >> >>> > >> > > > recommendations on when incompatible features should be >> >>> turned on >> >>> > in >> >>> > >> > > > implementations by default and a proposed release cadence >> for >> >>> > >> > > Parquet-java. >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > This was first published for discussion on the dev mailing >> >>> list on >> >>> > >> [3]. >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > Given we are headed into a holiday weekend in the US the >> vote >> >>> will >> >>> > >> > remain >> >>> > >> > > > open for until at least Wednesday, July 10th to ensure >> >>> adequate >> >>> > time >> >>> > >> > for >> >>> > >> > > > people who might be taking time away from their computer. >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > Thanks, >> >>> > >> > > > Micah >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > [ ] +1 Adopt the guidance in the PR proposals and merge >> them. >> >>> > >> > > > [ ] +0 >> >>> > >> > > > [ ] -1 Do not adopt the guidance because .... >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/258 >> >>> > >> > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/61/files >> >>> > >> > > > [3] >> >>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/bcc13dtdvnxvg55nhyowbwzqomfljgvb >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > >> >>> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >>> >> >> >> >
