+1 (non-binding) Best, Prashant
On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 12:33 PM Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 11:36 AM Ryan Blue <rdb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 10:22 AM Szehon Ho <szehon.apa...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> Thanks >>> Szehon >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 10:18 AM Daniel Weeks <dwe...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 (binding) >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 8:41 AM Russell Spitzer < >>>> russell.spit...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 (Bind) >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 8:14 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 (non binding) (as said in the PR :)) >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks ! >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> JB >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 3:00 PM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Hi everyone, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > A while ago, I sent out a DISCUSS around simplifying the encoding >>>>>> of the source-id(s) in the partition-spec and sort-order in the case of a >>>>>> multi-argument transform. In short, use source-id in the case of a single >>>>>> argument transform, and use source-ids in the case of multi-argument >>>>>> transforms. We've had some good discussions on the PR (thanks for jumping >>>>>> in, everyone!), and I feel there is consensus. Therefore, I would like to >>>>>> raise this vote to verify this across the mailing list. This vote will >>>>>> remain open for at least 72 hours. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Please consider this my +1 >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Kind regards, >>>>>> > Fokko >>>>>> >>>>>
