Re: Collecting Arrow critique and our roadmap on that

[Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>]

I read through and left some comments.

Would be great to turn into an FAQ section in the docs and add a link
to the navigation on the front page of the website.

On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:22 PM Uwe L. Korn <uw...@xhochy.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks to the all contributions that already came in. I made some more additions and hope to turn this into a PR to the site soon.
>
> Uwe
>
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2019, at 10:46 AM, Micah Kornfield wrote:
> > I think this is a good idea, as well.  I added comments and additions on
> > the document.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 11:47 AM Neal Richardson <
> > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Uwe, I think this is an excellent idea. I've started
> > >
> > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cgN7mYzH30URDTaioHsCP2d80wKKHDNs9f5s7vdb2mA/edit?usp=sharing
> > > to collect some ideas and notes. Once we have gathered our thoughts
> > > there, we can put them in the appropriate places.
> > >
> > > I think that some of the result will go into the FAQ, some into
> > > documentation (maybe more "how-to" and "getting started" guides in the
> > > respective language docs, as well as some "how to share Arrow data
> > > from X to Y"), and other things that we haven't yet done should go
> > > into a sort of Roadmap document on the main website. We have some very
> > > outdated content related to a roadmap on the confluence wiki that
> > > should be folded in as appropriate too.
> > >
> > > Neal
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:26 AM Uwe L. Korn <ma...@uwekorn.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > there has been a lot of public discussions lately with some mentions of
> > > actually informed, valid critique of things in the Arrow project. From my
> > > perspective, these things include "there is not STL-native C++ Arrow API",
> > > "the base build requires too much dependencies", "the pyarrow package is
> > > really huge and you cannot select single components". These are things we
> > > cannot tackle at the moment due to the lack of contributors to the project.
> > > But we can use this as a basis to point people that critique the project on
> > > this that this is not intentional but a lack of resources as well as it
> > > provides another point of entry for new contributors looking for work.
> > > >
> > > > Thus I would like to start a document (possibly on the website) where we
> > > list the major critiques on Arrow, mention our long-term solution to that
> > > and what JIRAs need to be done for that.
> > > >
> > > > Would that be something others would also see as valuable?
> > > >
> > > > There has also been a lot of uninformed criticism, I think that can be
> > > best combat by documentation, blog posts and public appearances at
> > > conferences and is not covered by this proposal.
> > > >
> > > > Uwe
> > >
> >

Re: Collecting Arrow critique and our roadmap on that

[Bryan Cutler <cu...@gmail.com>]

A lot of good info here, I added a point that has come up often for me.

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:03 AM Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I read through and left some comments.
>
> Would be great to turn into an FAQ section in the docs and add a link
> to the navigation on the front page of the website.
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:22 PM Uwe L. Korn <uw...@xhochy.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to the all contributions that already came in. I made some more
> additions and hope to turn this into a PR to the site soon.
> >
> > Uwe
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019, at 10:46 AM, Micah Kornfield wrote:
> > > I think this is a good idea, as well.  I added comments and additions
> on
> > > the document.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 11:47 AM Neal Richardson <
> > > neal.p.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Uwe, I think this is an excellent idea. I've started
> > > >
> > > >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cgN7mYzH30URDTaioHsCP2d80wKKHDNs9f5s7vdb2mA/edit?usp=sharing
> > > > to collect some ideas and notes. Once we have gathered our thoughts
> > > > there, we can put them in the appropriate places.
> > > >
> > > > I think that some of the result will go into the FAQ, some into
> > > > documentation (maybe more "how-to" and "getting started" guides in
> the
> > > > respective language docs, as well as some "how to share Arrow data
> > > > from X to Y"), and other things that we haven't yet done should go
> > > > into a sort of Roadmap document on the main website. We have some
> very
> > > > outdated content related to a roadmap on the confluence wiki that
> > > > should be folded in as appropriate too.
> > > >
> > > > Neal
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:26 AM Uwe L. Korn <ma...@uwekorn.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > there has been a lot of public discussions lately with some
> mentions of
> > > > actually informed, valid critique of things in the Arrow project.
> From my
> > > > perspective, these things include "there is not STL-native C++ Arrow
> API",
> > > > "the base build requires too much dependencies", "the pyarrow
> package is
> > > > really huge and you cannot select single components". These are
> things we
> > > > cannot tackle at the moment due to the lack of contributors to the
> project.
> > > > But we can use this as a basis to point people that critique the
> project on
> > > > this that this is not intentional but a lack of resources as well as
> it
> > > > provides another point of entry for new contributors looking for
> work.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thus I would like to start a document (possibly on the website)
> where we
> > > > list the major critiques on Arrow, mention our long-term solution to
> that
> > > > and what JIRAs need to be done for that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Would that be something others would also see as valuable?
> > > > >
> > > > > There has also been a lot of uninformed criticism, I think that
> can be
> > > > best combat by documentation, blog posts and public appearances at
> > > > conferences and is not covered by this proposal.
> > > > >
> > > > > Uwe
> > > >
> > >
>