jonkeane opened a new issue, #43623:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/43623
### Describe the enhancement requested
For a while we were able to support older versions of libarrow, but since
then we have had a few PRs bump into this and had to either bump our minimum
version or add extra code around this (#41998 and #42241 are ones I an think of
off the top of my head). In both circumstances there was some discussion /
friction about what the policy is, if we must retain backwards compatibility,
and if so what the best way is to approach that.
It's my understanding that there is no current live user(s) of using the
backwards compatibility and especially no specific "I have libarrow 15, but
need current versions of the arrow R package" use cases. Because of this, we
are free (and should feel free) to increase the required minimum version as we
need to in order to introduce new features. But it seems like there is some
ambiguity in this. I would love this issue to be a place of discussion around
this for anyone who has opinions. I tried to see if we already had
documentation explaining this + the philosophy here, but I didn't see any
(though please correct me if I missed it!), but the outcome of this ideally is
an update to our docs so our stance + recommendations on this are clear.
### Component(s)
R
--
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]
