[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-1228?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Gidon Gershinsky updated PARQUET-1228:
--
Labels: pull-request-available (was: )
> parquet-format code changes for encryption
I dislike the current build system complications as well.
However, in my opinion, combining the code bases will severely impact the
progress of the parquet-cpp project and implicitly the progress of the
entire parquet project.
Combining would have made much more sense if parquet-cpp is a mature
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-1360?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Wes McKinney resolved PARQUET-1360.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Resolved by
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-1360?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16561304#comment-16561304
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on PARQUET-1360:
-
wesm closed pull request #482: PARQUET-1360: Use
Wes McKinney created PARQUET-1362:
-
Summary: [C++] Validate or add option to validate arrow::Table
schema in parquet::arrow::FileWriter::WriteTable
Key: PARQUET-1362
URL:
hi Deepak,
responses inline
On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Deepak Majeti wrote:
> I dislike the current build system complications as well.
>
> However, in my opinion, combining the code bases will severely impact the
> progress of the parquet-cpp project and implicitly the progress of the
>
I do not claim to have insight into parquet-cpp development. However, from
our experience developing Ray, I can say that the monorepo approach (for
Ray) has improved things a lot. Before we tried various schemes to split
the project into multiple repos, but the build system and test
infrastructure
hi Donald,
This would make things worse, not better. Code changes routinely
involve changes to the build system, and so you could be talking about
having to making changes to 2 or 3 git repositories as the result of a
single new feature or bug fix. There isn't really a cross-repo CI
solution
