(#22506) arrow: fix config_options

[wgtmac]

Specify library name and version: arrow/15.0.0

Fix #22506

---

• I've read the contributing guidelines.
• I've used a recent Conan client version close to the currently deployed.
• I've tried at least one configuration locally with the conan-center hook activated.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[wgtmac]

@kou @raulcd

[ericLemanissierBot]

I detected other pull requests that are modifying arrow/all recipe:

• arrow: simplify recipe  #23363
• Arrow: Refactor auto options #23163

This message is automatically generated by https://github.com/ericLemanissier/conan-center-conflicting-prs so don't hesitate to report issues/improvements there.

[valgur]

See #21669.

Thank you for the PR, but this approach would break most of the handling of dependent option values.

[raulcd]

We can try to apply: #21669 to our sync PR: apache/arrow#39729

[wgtmac]

@valgur I have applied #21669 to apache/arrow#39729 and it works. Could you help moving forward #21669? Then I can sync it to the arrow repo. Thanks!

[wgtmac]

@valgur Do you mind taking a look at my proposed fix?

[conan-center-bot]

Conan v1 pipeline ✔️

All green in build 9 (d31ebc03df1ce16e5adb2a093ea02c2a73703f29):

• arrow/15.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/14.0.2:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/13.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/14.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/8.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/14.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/11.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/12.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/10.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/8.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/2.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/10.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/7.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/12.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/1.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

---

Conan v2 pipeline ✔️

Note: Conan v2 builds are now mandatory. Please read our discussion about it.

All green in build 8 (d31ebc03df1ce16e5adb2a093ea02c2a73703f29):

• arrow/14.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/15.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/13.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/14.0.2:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/14.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/12.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/2.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/12.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/11.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/10.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/8.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/10.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/8.0.1:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/7.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

• arrow/1.0.0:
  All packages built successfully! (All logs)

[wgtmac]

Also ping @toge @RubenRBS @uilianries for help.

To provide the context, this PR is based on #21669 (by @valgur) with a few lines to fix the simd_level option.

[wgtmac]

Thanks for the review! @valgur

[wgtmac]

@toge Could you help review this? It would be good to get this in before the Arrow community releasing 15.0.1. Thanks!

[raulcd]

@RubenRBS @toge @uilianries could we get a review and a merge, I am about to release 15.0.1 and it would be good for us to get this merged before. Thank you very much!

[wgtmac]

Thanks @RubenRBS for the assignment!

Hi @danimtb, would you mind taking a look?

[raulcd]

Hi, we have just released 15.0.1 but I am not going to create a PR on conan until this is merged as we should merge this first.

[wgtmac]

@RubenRBS Gentle ping. Could you help review this?

[danimtb]

Hi @wgtmac and sorry for the delayed response.

This recipe has given us some trouble in the past with several PRs trying to improve the management of options. There are too many of them and some of them affect others or give them a spcific value.

We have discussed this internally in the conan team and we think that we don't want to introduce more code in this recipe con manage options. Instead, we would like to simplify the recipe and remove any kind of automatic management of options (as it has proved to be problematic) and just restrict the combinations in the validate() method and direct the user to input the correct value for each option.

We believe this would be the less problematic approach that hopefully would solve the issues of this recipe regarding options and its management.

Hope that it make sense. Thank you!

[wgtmac]

Thanks for the reply! @danimtb

Instead, we would like to simplify the recipe and remove any kind of automatic management of options (as it has proved to be problematic) and just restrict the combinations in the validate() method and direct the user to input the correct value for each option.

That sounds good to me. We could simply pass the Conan option to the corresponding CMake option and those CMake files in the Arrow repo have already handled the relationship of options. IMHO, the remaining challenge is to figure out the third-party dependency requirement based on the user options. Will someone from the Conan community work on this?

[danimtb]

IMHO, the remaining challenge is to figure out the third-party dependency requirement based on the user options. Will someone from the Conan community work on this?

Yes, we will try to work on that!

[wgtmac]

That's awesome! Looking forward to the fix. @danimtb

[valgur]

Can be closed after #23163 was merged.