OK, I started a vote thread for the PRs. Thanks, Micah
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 12:44 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote: > Hey Micah, > > Thanks for raising this. I was going over all the open PRs on the table > spec, and I think it would be great to get these in since they provide some > valuable clarification. I think a VOTE is the most straightforward way to > get it in, you can find an example here > <https://lists.apache.org/thread/tp4dpw6qj5fyhrh17197bf6fg4gj3rk6>. > > Kind regards, > Fokko > > Op ma 15 jul 2024 om 08:29 schreef Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>: > >> Hi Micah >> >> We agreed that any change to spec is considered as code modification >> change and submitted to vote. I see your change is mostly >> "documentation" and not actually big change, so I got your point. >> However, I think it's clearer to keep the same process even for >> "small" changes. >> I would recommend to use two vote threads (one per change) to avoid >> confusion and vote on one specific change. >> >> Thanks ! >> Regards >> JB >> >> On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 8:39 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > I have to open pull requests to clarify points on the specification >> [1][2]. I believe these both document current behavior and don't represent >> a specification change (and they were already discussed on the mailing list) >> > >> > But given the recent focus on spec update process, I wanted to ask if >> these should be voted upon before merging? If so, would people prefer two >> separate votes or one to avoid overhead? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Micah >> > >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/8982 >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/8981 >> >
