+1 (non-binding) Regards Venkata krishnan
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 1:29 AM Martijn Visser <martijnvis...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 1:06 PM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > Thanks, > > Timo > > > > > > On 28.01.25 11:56, Fabian Hüske wrote: > > > +1 (binding) for this FLIP. > > > > > > Thank you, > > > Fabian > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 2:36 AM Natea Eshetu Beshada > > > <nbesh...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > > > > >> +1 (non-binding) > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 3:02 PM Alan Sheinberg > > >> <asheinb...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi everyone, > > >>> > > >>> I'd like to start a vote on FLIP-498 [1]. It proposes exposing > > >>> AsyncTableFunction as a proper user defined function. The type > already > > >>> exists for Lookup Joins, but isn't usable as other UDFs. This FLIP > > would > > >>> bring it up to parity with others. It has been discussed in this > thread > > >>> [2]. > > >>> > > >>> I would like to start a vote. The vote will be open for at least 72 > > >> hours > > >>> unless there is an objection or insufficient votes. > > >>> > > >>> [1] > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-498*3A*AsyncTableFunction*for*async*table*function*support__;JSsrKysrKw!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!fC3nb5UMFyithLduUnQBmz2_JkEPNXbQKqzGQs5Zdijv15pJ0CY9UIPfznyNiD1wSJaJJym_PYZVDHJvRt1l0rmzvXzZ$ > > >>> [2] > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.apache.org/thread/kgbpj96b4lw1c39gq5p0j0t8b1ssm368__;!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!fC3nb5UMFyithLduUnQBmz2_JkEPNXbQKqzGQs5Zdijv15pJ0CY9UIPfznyNiD1wSJaJJym_PYZVDHJvRt1l0h6Bb5K4$ > > >>> < > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.apache.org/thread/kgbpj96b4lw1c39gq5p0j0t8b1ssm368__;!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!fC3nb5UMFyithLduUnQBmz2_JkEPNXbQKqzGQs5Zdijv15pJ0CY9UIPfznyNiD1wSJaJJym_PYZVDHJvRt1l0h6Bb5K4$ > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > >
