alamb commented on PR #6965: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/6965#issuecomment-2591068349
> As I was working on this, I noticed the module signature for arrow's [parquet reader](https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/blob/main/parquet/src/arrow/arrow_reader/mod.rs) and datafusion's [arrow_array_reader.rs](https://github.com/apache/datafusion/blob/main/datafusion/core/src/datasource/avro_to_arrow/arrow_array_reader.rs) are based on a Builder pattern. To simplify adopting these arrow-avro changes into DataFusion, should we implement the module signature to something similar to what is already in DataFusion today? In my opinion, the code in this crate (arrow-rs) should follow the existing patterns in this repository (specifically the parquet arrow reader https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/blob/main/parquet/src/arrow/arrow_reader/mod.rs that you point to) > Also, do you prefer whether the public signature for the reader should be included in this PR or a PR following this PR that proves the reader changes? I'm happy to contribute the public module signature. Given the current release process, we need to be careful with breaking API changes as described in https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#breaking-changes Thus in so far that we can avoid causing API churn / require contortions that would be good One thing we could do potentially is put all the code behind the `experimental` feature flag so are free to modify the API even as we release minor incremental versions -- 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: github-unsubscr...@arrow.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org