PDEP-10: Add pyarrow as a required dependency #52711
Update 0010-required-pyarrow-dependency.md
- Loading branch information
commit f047032598bbdb2c84acc4d51e70bde0643ea1a8
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I recall some discussion we had on this PDEP about having the warning point to a GitHub issue where we could collect feedback on this requirement. If we agree on this concept, I think it should be mentioned here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you mind adding that the warning will point to the feedback issue?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Apologies for the naive question, but I thought the purpose of this PDEP was to collect feedback on pyarrow as a required dependency? I understand visibility may be more if there's a link to a new issue in a warning in a future version of pandas, but to me, doing it that way (to collect feedback all over again) just seems like we're going to be having this discussion again in 6 months and will end up kicking kicking the can down the road.
I think that issue would only get traction from people who strongly don't want pyarrow. There could be millions of users happy or neutral with the requirement, and we'd only see the 10 people unhappy enough to voice their concerns.