dannycjones commented on PR #3414: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/3414#issuecomment-6315708793
> I share same concern with @kevinjqliu , this change is over complicated. If the clarification outdated, cargo deny will fail, and that's what exactly we want. This isn't true though, it doesn't fail. Clarifications are just ignored if they don't match perfectly. That's what led me to build a wrapping script. I'm OK with us accepting that the cost is too high and rely on the current state being OK. I do share the concern there on maintenance burden. The other approach I'm looking at is that we make sure these checks are handled upstream in `cargo-deny` and `cargo-about`, which would remove the burden on us and put the code in the right place and benefit all. -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
