Hi folks, I wanted to provide an update on this proposal and also extend discussion.
I started to rework on the REST Catalog proposal by splitting in v1-improvements and v2-proposal (focusing on extensions), step by step. I would like to emphasize a few proposals from the doc: 1. In order to guarantee isolation of concerns and easier contribution, I think it would be great to create iceberg-rest repo and move openapi.yml in this repo. 2. In the iceberg-rest repo, in order to verify the spec, we should have a simple reference implementation. The purpose is NOT to have a production grade implementation, but a simple ref implementation to verify that all is working/integrate fine with engines and different iceberg components. Weeks ago I started an implementation with Quarkus but I stopped as we had a discussion saying it doesn't make sense to have an "runtime" as part of Iceberg. I agree with that but I still think the proposal of a simple ref implementation as part of iceberg-rest makes sense. I think I was wrong to start with Quarkus (too large), I will resume work this ref impl using pure Java (SPI like, similar to what I did in Apache Karaf Minho https://github.com/apache/karaf-minho). 3. The iceberg-rest repo would also contain a TCK to verify REST Catalog implementation compliance with the spec I propose to rework on the REST v2 proposal including these topics. Thoughts ? Thanks Regards JB On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 4:36 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > With several people from the community, we started to craft a proposal > to design new REST Catalog Spec. > > I used the "proposal process" to track this: > > - The proposal "issue" is here: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/10075 > - The proposal document is here: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JUtFpdEoa6IAKt1EzJi_re0PUbh56XnfUtRe5WAfl0s/edit?usp=sharing > > I propose the following next steps about this proposal: > 1. Please review and comment in the doc > 2. After ~ week, I would like to schedule a meeting to discuss the > proposal and refine the document > 3. Once the proposal is good enough (I would say a couple of weeks), I > will call for a formal vote (according to the proposal process). > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB
