Thank you David for your replies (also on FIP-49). I agree with the high level principles that:
1. FIP-32 focuses on SQL query support 2. FIP-32 to be a parent FIP of per-protocol SQL Query Gateway 3. FIP-49 focuses on REST support for native Fluss operations (lookup, append, scan, upsert) With this, we can focus our immediate effort on FIP-49 and it can lead the design around REST gateway and shared components which FIP-32 will depend on. I’m curious on hearing from others on their thoughts on this. Best regards Keith On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 at 14:39, David Reger <[email protected]> wrote: > And maybe to add one more thing: > > Anadditional thought that came to mind after sending my previous email: one > thing we may still want to align on is where simple native REST lookups fit > into the overall architecture. Whether they belong in FIP-49 or FIP-32 is > probably a separate discussion, but I think it's worth making that > distinction explicit since they seem conceptually different from SQL/query > execution. > > Best regards, David >
