amoeba commented on issue #43623: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/43623#issuecomment-2403649351
Hey @jonkeane, thanks for starting this discussion. I'm pretty split on this but I'm leaning towards removing the CI job and not enforcing backwards-compatibility. If we were to ever get libarrow on the CRAN check machines, we would then have to contend with whatever version of libarrow CRAN was on and it will likely be less up to date than we'd like. Having a well-stated goal of maximizing the number of previous major libarrow versions we can build the R package with would help us in this situation. However, (1) the above scenario isn't very likely to happen and (2) the backwards compatibility job has caused friction and confusion, most recently with https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/44357. In the latter and other cases, I think part of the confusion is due to the fact that no other components of the Arrow project have anything similar. It would be less confusing if, for example, PyArrow had a similar policy. I'd like to hear others' thoughts as well. -- 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: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
