Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-10-17 Thread Wes McKinney
That is fine with me. On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 2:32 AM Uwe L. Korn wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 16, 2018, at 1:05 AM, Julien Le Dem wrote: > > What does archiving the master branch look like? Are we renaming master and > > leaving a readme pointing to the new repo? > > That would be my preferred option.

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-10-15 Thread Julien Le Dem
What does archiving the master branch look like? Are we renaming master and leaving a readme pointing to the new repo? On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:30 PM Wes McKinney wrote: > OK. There is still some code (examples, CLI tools) that needs to be > moved over. Once that's done and all the

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-20 Thread Wes McKinney
OK. There is still some code (examples, CLI tools) that needs to be moved over. Once that's done and all the outstanding PRs are moved/closed, I will do that On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 8:45 AM Uwe L. Korn wrote: > > Hello Wes, > > I'm definitely +1 on archiving the master branch. I'm not sure what

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-20 Thread Uwe L. Korn
Hello Wes, I'm definitely +1 on archiving the master branch. I'm not sure what you mean exactly with this. I would have simply added a final commit that deletes all code and adds a message to the README that the repository has moved into a another repo. Cheers Uwe On Thu, Sep 13, 2018, at

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-13 Thread Wes McKinney
hi folks, Could I get some feedback about the follow-up items? There are still some parts of the codebase that need to be migrated. Additionally, I'm proposing to archive the master branch so that people with build toolchains running against parquet-cpp master will be forced to migrate. The hard

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-09 Thread Wes McKinney
Might make sense to archive the master branch so that people's now-outdated build toolchains (where they may be cloning apache/parquet-cpp) will fail fast. We are already starting to get bug reports along these lines. Thoughts? On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 10:43 AM Wes McKinney wrote: > > We should

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-08 Thread Wes McKinney
We should probably also write a blog post on the Apache Arrow website to increase visibility of this move to the broader community. On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 10:42 AM Wes McKinney wrote: > > Dear all -- the merge has been completed, thank you! 318 patches > (after the filter-branch grafting

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-08 Thread Wes McKinney
Dear all -- the merge has been completed, thank you! 318 patches (after the filter-branch grafting procedure) were merged to apache/arrow We have some follow up work to do: * Move patches from apache/parquet-cpp to apache/arrow * Add CONTRIBUTING.md and note to README that patches are no longer

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-07 Thread Wes McKinney
After a lot of time beating my head against Windows toolchain issues (I now know a _lot_ about this topic!) I have a green build at https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/2453 I'd like to merge this before much more time passes (i.e. today if possible) and work on getting the outstanding patches

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-04 Thread Wes McKinney
Great. It is definitely going to require some follow up patches to fix up the various packaging tasks, but at least the Linux Python wheels will still be working to start On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 2:04 PM Uwe L. Korn wrote: > > Hello Wes, > > I have not much time this week but I hope to squeeze in

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-04 Thread Uwe L. Korn
Hello Wes, I have not much time this week but I hope to squeeze in some minutes tomorrow afternoon to review the code. As this is a very big merge, I want to be extra careful to not break anything really badly. Hopefully more eyes will help. Thank you for all the work in pushing this forward

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-09-04 Thread Wes McKinney
Dear all, The repo merge is nearly ready to go modulo some fixes to CI. There will be a number of follow up issues to re-establish the various (untested) build procedures in parquet-cpp https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/2453 I would like to merge this by EOD Wednesday 9/5, or Thursday at

[RESULT] [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-21 Thread Wes McKinney
hi all, with 3 binding +1 votes, the vote carries. We will discuss with Apache Arrow about how to specifically proceed I have already done the preparatory work to undertake the merge https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/2453 thanks Wes On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Wes McKinney wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-21 Thread Wes McKinney
Yes, feel free to have a look at https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/2453 I'm not very in favor of having a commingled non-linear history that makes git bisect difficult. We will have to discuss on the Arrow ML Here's an example from Apache Spark where a similar merge took place

Re: [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-21 Thread Uwe L. Korn
I have a very strong preference to keep the git history. I will have a look tomorrow to find the correct git magic to get a linear history. For me a single merge commit would be ok but I'm fine to spend an additional hour on this if you care strongly about linear history. Uwe On Sun, Aug 19,

Re: [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-20 Thread Wes McKinney
hi Ryan, On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Ryan Blue wrote: > +1 > > I think this sounds like a reasonable solution to the problem, and one that > is supported by the people that will do the work. > > I'd appreciate some clarification on this: > >> The Parquet community can create scripts to

Re: [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-20 Thread Ryan Blue
+1 I think this sounds like a reasonable solution to the problem, and one that is supported by the people that will do the work. I'd appreciate some clarification on this: > The Parquet community can create scripts to "cut" Parquet C++ releases I think this should be a requirement of

Re: [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-19 Thread Wes McKinney
OK. I'm a bit -0 on doing anything that results in Arrow having a nonlinear git history (and rebasing is not really an option) but we can discuss that more later On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Uwe L. Korn wrote: > +1 on this but also see my comments in the mail on the discussions. > > We

Re: [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-19 Thread Uwe L. Korn
+1 on this but also see my comments in the mail on the discussions. We should also keep the git history of parquet-cpp, that should not be hard with git and there is probably a StackOverflow answer out there that gives you the commands to do the merge. Uwe On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, at 12:57 AM,

Re: [VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-16 Thread Wes McKinney
In case any are interested: my estimate of the work involved in the migration to be about a full day of total work, possibly less. As soon as the migration plan is decided upon I intend to execute ASAP so that ongoing development efforts are not disrupted. Additionally, in flight patches do not

[VOTE] Moving Apache Parquet C++ development process to a monorepo structure with Apache Arrow C++

2018-08-15 Thread Wes McKinney
hi all, As discussed on the mailing list [1] I am proposing to undertake a restructuring of the development process for parquet-cpp and its consumption in the Arrow ecosystem to benefit the developers and users of both communities. The specific actions we would take would be: 1) Move the source