ARROW-4550: [JS] Fix AMD pattern

[mbostock]

Untested but proposed fix to #3629 using the standard UMD pattern as generated by Rollup.

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #3630 into master will increase coverage by 2.03%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3630      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.68%   90.71%   +2.03%     
==========================================
  Files         627       71     -556     
  Lines       79681     4935   -74746     
  Branches     1069     1069              
==========================================
- Hits        70664     4477   -66187     
+ Misses       9011      452    -8559     
  Partials        6        6

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
js/src/schema.ts	84.61% <0%> (-1.93%)	⬇️
js/src/visitor/indexof.ts	97.26% <0%> (-1.37%)	⬇️
js/src/ipc/metadata/message.ts	90.12% <0%> (-1.28%)	⬇️
python/pyarrow/ipc.pxi
cpp/src/arrow/csv/chunker-test.cc
cpp/src/parquet/column_page.h
cpp/src/parquet/bloom_filter-test.cc
cpp/src/arrow/array/builder_decimal.cc
cpp/src/plasma/client.cc
cpp/src/arrow/io/test-common.h
... and 549 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update af60c2e...0930385. Read the comment docs.

[kou]

Could you open an issue on JIRA https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW and prepend "ARROW-XXXX: [JS] " to title of this pull request?

See also: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ARROW/Contributing+to+Apache+Arrow

[domoritz]

I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-4550.

@mbostock can you rename the PR title to "ARROW-4550: [JS] Fix AMD pattern"?

[mbostock]

Renamed as requested. Thanks for looking at this!

[TheNeuralBit]

@trxcllnt can you take a look at this? you're much more familiar with the build system

[trxcllnt]

This looks ok to me. IIRC I used one of the standard UMD templates, and possibly modified it to match Webpack's umdNamedDefine output. I haven't used AMD in quite a while, so 👍 from me if this fixes it for @mbostock

[TheNeuralBit]

Ok I'll do a smoke test locally then merge. Thanks @mbostock!

[TheNeuralBit]

@mbostock is there a way to test this change in Observable before we cut an actual release?

[mbostock]

@TheNeuralBit Yes, if you have the generated file somewhere, you can require the URL. GitHub makes this a little tricky because they force the content-type to be text/plain, but you can workaround that like so:

require(await fetch("https://gist.githubusercontent.com/mbostock/f421358acd00c94badaceed4d4034d36/raw/51026b908d68b94e191e8b4f3d5f46c41a4e00ac/amd-test.js").then(response => response.blob()).then(blob => URL.createObjectURL(blob)))

Alternatively you can require a local file:

viewof file = html`<input type=file accept=.js>`

require(await Files.url(file))

https://beta.observablehq.com/d/9e7bac640df7d65a

https://gist.github.com/mbostock/f421358acd00c94badaceed4d4034d36

[mbostock]

Any update on when this will be released? It’s been a bummer that Apache Arrow is broken out of the box (at least on Observable) for about thirty days despite a fix being merged.

[xhochy]

We will integrate the JS releases in the mainline releases and hopefully release this next week as 0.13.0

[wesm]

BTW absolutely nothing has blocked making a JavaScript release sooner, but no one has initiated those conversations on the mailing list

[wesm]

(i.e. @mbostock you or anyone could have asked on dev@arrow.apache.org about making a release as soon as this patch was merged)

[mbostock]

I didn’t think it was necessary to request a release given that the maintainers were apparently aware of the library being broken by evidence of the fact that this PR was merged, but I will keep that in mind for the future.

[wesm]

Yes, in the future, when something like this comes up, I would recommend being a "squeaky wheel" until you get what you need. The community must be given the opportunity to inspect the software before publishing it to NPM (a good thing IMHO, in light of some of the problems the ecosystem has had) but the release process is not complicated

[TheNeuralBit]

Sorry @mbostock you're right we should've been on top of this.

I'm in favor of cutting an 0.4.1 release ASAP, all the JIRAs tagged for that release are already closed and several of them are bugfixes for 0.4.0. We can integrate with the mainline releases after that.

[wesm]

The new package is up https://www.npmjs.com/package/apache-arrow/v/0.4.1. Please let us know if any issues

[mbostock]

Thanks! 👍 I’ve sent a corresponding suggestion to the Introduction to Apache Arrow on Observable.

[kou]

@mbostock Could you create a JIRA account and tell me your account? I want to set you to the assignee of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-4550 . Then we can list your name in 0.13.0 release note.