Based on the Plasma-fork discussion thread, I think maybe we should wait
until after the 2.0 release and if no one comes forward to support it, we
can stop shipping it. We should probably send an e-mail at to user@ also
to raise awareness.
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 12:09 PM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
I would certainly be ok with removing Plasma. Factually, it's unmaintained.
Regards
Antoine.
Le 07/09/2020 à 21:06, Uwe L. Korn a écrit :
> If we do that, we should be clear with that and remove the code. Shipping
> Plasma as part of the release and not maintaining it as other parts of the
If we do that, we should be clear with that and remove the code. Shipping
Plasma as part of the release and not maintaining it as other parts of the
Arrow libraries seems inconsistent and will just be an annoyance to user to
find a partly unusable component.
Cheers
Uwe
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020, at
I think that makes sense. They can be reopened if necessary.
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 9:49 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> The Plasma component in our C++ codebase is now unmaintained, with the
> original authors and maintainers having forked the codebase on their
> side. I propose to clo
Hello,
The Plasma component in our C++ codebase is now unmaintained, with the
original authors and maintainers having forked the codebase on their
side. I propose to close the open Plasma issues in JIRA as "Won't fix".
Is there any concern about this?
Regards
Antoine.
