jorgecarleitao commented on pull request #9211: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9211#issuecomment-761867212
@jhorstmann , then I think it is related to what @nevi-me was saying about the children. I am not sure we can have a fix ready for 3.0.0, though :( @rdettai I understand that concern. Could you describe which areas do you get more pain from backward incompatible changes? I would be fine with a 1 release deprecation when feasible, at least on the `arrow` crate. My feeling is that we will need at least 2 more releases to stabilize `arrow` + `parquet`. The next release I will be working in cleaning up the arrow crate's API (I have been doing it the previous already). Unfortunately, there is still some work ahead, as some of the very fundamental parts of the crate need some refactoring to support the high performance that we goal towards (e.g. #9076 is backward incompatible). The two areas that I will be focusing short-term is on `Buffer` / `MutableBuffer` and all (currently safe but actually `unsafe`) APIs. I will then jump to the creation of Arrays (which is based on `Buffer`), and then `kernels` (which is based on the creation of Arrays / Buffers). @nevi-me, @alamb , @andygrove do we merge this on the 3.0, or should we postpone? If yes, we should probably flag this on the mailing list. If not, then no action needed :) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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: us...@infra.apache.org
