Oops.. Sorry for the confusion. I thought only PMC votes are binding. Thanks for the clarification @Timo :-D
-- Rong On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 7:12 AM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 for the syntax and their semantics > > I think the implementation part is still a bit unclear to me because it > only ensures the current status but still does not solve future > requirements such as per-partition watermarks that need to be pushed > into a connector such as Kafka. We can also discuss that as part of the > computed column FLIP. > > @Rong: Why do you think you vote is not binding? Committer votes are > binding :-) > > Thanks, > Timo > > On 29.09.19 02:17, Rong Rong wrote: > > +1 (non-binding). Thanks for the effort and leading the discussions @Jark > > > > -- > > Rong > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 7:36 PM JingsongLee <lzljs3620...@aliyun.com > .invalid> > > wrote: > > > >> +1 non-binding > >> (nit: Add a road map?) > >> > >> Best, > >> Jingsong Lee > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> From:Kurt Young <ykt...@gmail.com> > >> Send Time:2019年9月26日(星期四) 20:44 > >> To:dev <dev@flink.apache.org> > >> Subject:Re: [VOTE] FLIP-66: Support Time Attribute in SQL DDL (#2) > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> Best, > >> Kurt > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:52 AM Jark Wu <imj...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I would like to start the vote for FLIP-66 [1], which is discussed and > >>> reached a consensus in the discussion thread[2]. > >>> > >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. I'll try to close it after > >>> Oct. 01 08:00 UTC, unless there is an objection or not enough votes. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Jark > >>> > >>> [1]: > >>> > >>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-66%3A+Support+time+attribute+in+SQL+DDL > >>> [2]: > >>> > >>> > >> > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-FLIP-66-Support-time-attribute-in-SQL-DDL-tt32766.html > > >
