alamb commented on issue #12254: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/12254#issuecomment-2356571864
> @alamb I’m generally in favor of moving additional features from the core to separate subprojects. However, could we consider using a more general name than datafusion-functions-duckdb? What are your thoughts on using something like datafusion-functions-sql or another broader name? I do not have a strong preference -- I think it likely depends on the usecase: * trying to migrate spark workloads * trying to migrate duckdb workloads * triynt to make the most useful sql system you can However, let's not let get too carried away with details at the moment. I created https://github.com/datafusion-contrib/datafusion-functions-extra and added @dmitrybugakov and @austin362667 as admins. If anyone else wants to help let me know and we can add you too. @dmitrybugakov or @austin362667 would you be willing to setup the basic skeleton of the repo? Perhaps you could follow the model of https://github.com/datafusion-contrib/datafusion-functions-json for readme and registration function And then try to put the `mode` function there: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/12385 -- 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...@datafusion.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: github-h...@datafusion.apache.org
