agree with cleaning up blogs and talks as discussed in the community sync that Kevin linked.
Meanwhile, I am also looking forward to future Iceberg dev/announcement blogs, as discussed in the dev thread <https://lists.apache.org/thread/txhw1f27pj7444t8o8jf5qoyqk2zhjxf> Max started. Regarding the 3rd-party integrations, I would recommend dropping them from the left-side `nav` menus. It could be just one page with links to the integrations (external or internal pages) similar to the vendors' page. Right now, there are only 3 internal pages: Apache Amoro, Daft, RisingWave. These can probably also be changed to links to external pages. But it can be addressed in a separate PR. [image: image.png] On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 2:28 PM Kevin Liu <kevinjq...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 for both items. > > We discussed #1 in the 8/13 community sync > <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YuGhUdukLP5gGiqCbk0A5_Wifqe2CZWgOd3TbhY3UQg/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.5bw81o5btvl6>with > the consensus to remove the blogs/and talks/ page. I think keeping the > talks/ page is a good idea, there are a lot of talks from the previous > Iceberg Summits :) > > Agree with #2, integrations/vendors usually update their own docs first. > And it relieves the burden from keeping the docs in sync. > > Thanks for the PR! > > Best, > Kevin Liu > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 2:03 PM Russell Spitzer <russell.spit...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Y'all >> >> We talked about this a bit in a community sync a while back and I know a >> bunch of committers have >> been working off some of the consensus we reached then but I'm not sure >> we ever actually documented >> this. >> >> *1. Should the Apache Iceberg community still maintain a set of Blogs and >> Talks that are curated on the * >> *main site by committers and PMC members?* >> >> The arguments in favor: >> >> The current state requires individuals to make decisions on about >> inclusion/exclusion of content >> It is very difficult to maintain and keep up to date >> There are lots of blog and talk aggregations for Iceberg content out >> there already >> >> The arguments against: >> >> Have an easy place for folks to find more Iceberg Content >> Have a location to post internal announcements >> ----------- >> >> Personally I think we should just drop the blogs site for now with the >> option of bringing back an Iceberg >> dev only blog in the future and switch the Talks page to just link out to >> the official Youtube channel which mostly >> has entries for Iceberg Summit and our community syncs. >> >> ------- >> >> *2. Should all vendor/integrations link out to external documentation >> rather than having in tree maintained* >> *documentation?* >> >> This I think is more straightforward. We have already had a lot of >> link-rot and Integration documentation falling behind >> actual integrations. Here I really don't want to break any previous hard >> links to Iceberg's docs so I think we should leave >> everything currently in tree, in tree. But for all new contributions and >> on any updates to a vendor.md or integration.md we >> should always link out to third party documentation unless we are >> documenting something that is actually in the Iceberg >> library (like S3FileIO and friends). >> >> Thanks as usual everyone, >> Russ >> >> Here is a PR with my suggested changes for the above two points >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14110 >> >>
