Move the udf module to user_defined #1112
Conversation
…sion.user_defined
… rest of the site and to correct some errors when building the rst files using autoapi
|
@crystalxyz FYI this does touch on the documentation you wrote. Please let me know if you think I should change back the formatting. I did need to switch from markdown to rst format for our documentation build system. |
|
@timsaucer The documentation changes look good to me! Do you think that adding a comment in |
|
@mesejo @kosiew @chenkovsky @kevinjqliu Would any of you mind doing a review? We haven't released datafusion-python in a while and this is one of the PRs waiting to go in. 1/3 |
|
Looks good to me. Considering there is a breaking change, I think it would be a good idea to also add a follow up task to add a migration guide in the ../dev/changelog/.. for the new release. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM!
I want to double check that this is fine since this is the udf function
https://grep.app/search?q=from+datafusion+import+udf
Which issue does this PR close?
None
Rationale for this change
Right now we have some minor confusion when importing from the
udfmodule because at the root ofdatafusionwe also have audfmethod. This is a minor inconvenience, but it has shown up a few times where a user wants to import one or the other. This removes the uncertainty by changing theudfmodule touser_defined.Also since this module includes scalar, aggregate, and window functions it is a cleaner organization.What changes are included in this PR?
datafusion.udfmodule todatafusion.user_defined. This is a breaking change. Fortunately most historical users have been using the helper functions which exist in the root module.Are there any user-facing changes?
Users will need to update their module imports from
datafusion.udftodatafusion.user_defined. Thedatafusion.udffunction is NOT impacted.