ritchie46 commented on pull request #9211: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9211#issuecomment-761806984
> > Thanks @nevi-me > > > Consider making the function private. It's been public for 2 years, but only Arrow uses it. It's a general-enough function that if an external crate is using it, they probably should be using some other crate instead. > > > > > > Search result from github with https://github.com/search?l=Rust&p=5&q=arrow+bit_util&type=Code shows only several projects that are using `arrow::bit_util`: > > > > * https://github.com/ritchie46/polars/ > > * https://github.com/liurenjie1024/blitzwing/ > > Thanks @mqy > > CC @ritchie46 @liurenjie1024 Thanks for the heads up @nevi-me. I want to hook in in this discussion because I don't really know where I could otherwise. In view of the upcoming 3.0 release, I started refactoring to use arrow 3.0 (using git dependencies). And I must say, it is becoming an increasingly painful process. What is arrows view on backwards compatibility? Could logic in the public API have a deprecated flag for a release cycle or could there be pre-releases so that third party are able to stay in sync? ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
