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

Reply via email to