JakeDern commented on issue #413: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs-object-store/issues/413#issuecomment-3156678311
I get your point but if you have mutually exclusive features and you have transitive dependencies on object store with different crypto providers enabled then my understanding is you will not be able to compile which is why it's discouraged. Not sure if it's going to be a problem in practice but sounds like a risk. On the other hand, that might be the right tradeoff for a crypto provider - In my current case I'd probably want that so that I can definitively prove that no dependencies are using the (in our definition) "non-compliant" provider(s) because it they wouldn't even be in my dependency tree. I think either approach is reasonable. Once I get some direction from the maintainers I'm happy to take a look at this -- 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
