On Wed, 3 Jun 2026 at 08:56, Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Calendar-based presets are ostensibly not version numbers and don't look > like such (unless you're Ubuntu :-)), so there are no expectations that > they correspond to a git tag or something. > well, there's C99, which superceded C89 and which was itself superceded by C11 (which does not relate to Lonson's C11 bus route even though that came first by decades). Both C and C++ are on 3 year cycles now, aren't they? Those languages are notable in that they deprecate and then remove support for old features: if you want to compile C89 code with C23, you may find some surprises, and I suspect C++ is even more traumatic. For any file format "we can read all your existing data" is a key feature people rely on, even if you may need to set some flags about how timezones are interpreted. Formats which introduce breaking changes (XHTML?) may be technically more pure, but that purity can hurt adoption. It's why I'm personally in favour of backwards compatible changes like the coexistence of footer formats. But I'm also aware that a number "Parquet v2026" helps motivate people to upgrade to compatible versions, paying customers to request support from suppliers, and so drive progress. It also makes for a good compatiblity checklist, if Spark 5.0 ships with Parquet 2026, then alternative engines will need to stay current Presumably this'll be on the agenda of today's (June 3) community call?
