Hey all,

Thanks JB for kicking this discussion off! I agree that we should probably
do a release soon, I was thinking even sooner than mid February. It would
be great to have a 1.8 release before the end of January. I was going to
bring this up in the community sync next week.

There are some additional backport PRs for Spark DV integration and default
values that should get in, but those are pretty straightforward backports.
There are additional memory-consumption optimizations for DVs that ideally
would get in for 1.8 but I'd say they are not a must have.

I'd propose that folks add what they think should get into 1.8.0 to the
milestone
<https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3A%22Iceberg+1.8.0%22>
.
In next week's community sync we can get to a consensus on any lingering
specific items, and follow up on this thread if needed. In the meantime, we
can review any of the PRs in the milestone and if there's not a consensus
on the approach or if the change requires significantly more work, we may
just want to punt those to a follow on 1.9 release.

Let me know what you think!

Thanks,
Amogh Jahagirdar

On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 9:52 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> wrote:

> I think it would be nice to include the Auth Manager improvements into
> 1.8.0.
>
> Here's the most recent PR on that subject, but I think there will be a
> couple more (per previous discussions):
>
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11844
>
> Thanks,
> Dmitri.
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 1:52 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> We did Apache Iceberg 1.7.0 release on Nov 8, 2024. If we want to keep
>> our release "pace", 1.8.0 should be released around mid February.
>>
>> I think we already have a good "train" of merged PRs (or should be
>> merged soon): default values, REST auth improvements, dependencies
>> updates, etc.
>>
>> WDYT about 1.8.0 mid Feb ? If so, I propose we update GitHub Issues
>> and PRs we would like to "target" to 1.8.0.
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>

Reply via email to