Parquet responseformat #43
Conversation
The parquet entry made the table wider, so delete an empty column and avoid an indent to stop the hbox overflowing.
|
If you change the action to |
|
You're right. I made the CI fix at #44, so if you approve and merge that, then this one should be good to merge too. |
|
I've merged PR #45 and forced the buikld, but this still uses the v1 action, despite showing no diff and not being behind the master branch. maybe you need to update vs master to trigger it properly?? I was expecting to be able to do that but can't |
|
Not using the v1 action, it's failing for a different reason now. I've commented further on this at #45. |
|
from the comments in $45, looks like |
|
Now I'm confused. Again. The build is failing with a report about using actions/upload-artifact: v1. But it should be merging into ivoa-std:master which now has an updated build.yml (actions/upload-artifact@v4, no v1s). Nothing in the branch belonging to this PR touches the CI. Do I have to make another PR with this branch? |
|
Can you merge master into your branch and push that to your fork? I think that will sort it out |
|
usually the summary/checks say when a PR is behind (missing commits from) master, but here it never said that. Strange. |
|
Well at least I managed to merge this branch ... but I see the CI is still failing, for a different reason now. |
Parquet files becoming more common. Having a suitable
RESPONSEFORMATalias will make it more convenient to request service table output in parquet format. This was requested by Mario Juric in the Apps telecon on 5 Nov 2024. I don't see any disadvantage or negative impact of adding this.