+1 (non-binding)
On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 12:57 AM Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > Thanks, > Alex > > Le jeu. 29 janv. 2026 à 08:19, Bharath Krishna <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >> +1, that was a missing piece for view authorization! >> >> On 2026/01/29 07:03:31 roryqi wrote: >> > +1, excited to see this. I am working on related work about Apache >> > Gravitino. >> > >> > Christian Thiel <[email protected]> 于2026年1月29日周四 14:50写道： >> > > >> > > +1 (non-binding) >> > > >> > > Gábor Kaszab <[email protected]> schrieb am Do. 29. Jan. 2026 um >> > > 07:22: >> > >> >> > >> +1 (nb) >> > >> >> > >> Gábor >> > >> >> > >> On Thu, 29 Jan 2026, 00:02 Adnan Hemani via dev, >> > >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> +1 (non-binding) >> > >>> >> > >>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 10:17 AM Steven Wu <[email protected]> >> > >>> wrote: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> +1 >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 8:02 AM Russell Spitzer >> > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> +1 >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 10:01 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner >> > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> +1 >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 6:29 PM Prashant Singh >> > >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Hello everyone ! >> > >>>>>>> The namespace separator for nested namespaces discussion is >> > >>>>>>> converged (thanks a ton Eduard) >> > >>>>>>> I additionally also added wording for the nested views per the >> > >>>>>>> feedback. >> > >>>>>>> The spec proposal [1] is ready for review again, I have also >> > >>>>>>> updated the reference implementation too from client side [2] per >> > >>>>>>> spec. >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Please do have a pass and vote based on how you all feel, when you >> > >>>>>>> get some time. Appreciate all the feedback so far ! >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13810 >> > >>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13979 >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Best, >> > >>>>>>> Prashant Singh >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 10:04 AM Prashant Singh >> > >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> Thanks for the feedback, Ryan. I agree that we should leave the >> > >>>>>>>> vote open longer and get the wording right. I'll work on >> > >>>>>>>> addressing the new feedbacks. >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> Best, >> > >>>>>>>> Prashant Singh >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 8:59 AM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> I think this is a good addition, but I think it may need a bit >> > >>>>>>>>> of work to get the wording right and there's still ongoing >> > >>>>>>>>> discussion. Maybe we should leave this vote open longer until >> > >>>>>>>>> the discussion settles? >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> Also, I want to point out that this is another use of a specific >> > >>>>>>>>> separator char. I think it would be good to revisit our >> > >>>>>>>>> separator discussion and finally close on it. >> > >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 12:33 AM John Zhuge <[email protected]> >> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 6:23 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> >> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>> +1 on the spec change. It’s a solid first step toward enabling >> > >>>>>>>>>>> DEFINER views. As usual, the spec change is intentionally kept >> > >>>>>>>>>>> separate from access control. >> > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>> Yufei >> > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 8:18 AM huaxin gao >> > >>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 6:38 PM Prashant Singh >> > >>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All, >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I propose adding an optional referenced-by to the REST >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> loadTable call, which will contain the fully qualified name >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the view (namespace of the view name and the view name) >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> in case the table is being referenced by a view. >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This will be really helpful in a couple of ways : >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. First step towards enabling DEFINER views >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Audit, incase one wants to track what's the base objects >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> accessed from the direct object accessed (example: doc) >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For details please check: >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Spec change PR: >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13810 >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Reference Implementation PR: >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13979 >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Discuss Thread: >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/01gb9rygdd1gqks7lnl1o6440qocnh9m >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours: >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Add these changes to the spec >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0 >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Prashant Singh >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> -- >> > >>>>>>>>>> John Zhuge >> >
