+1 (non-binding)
On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 5:03 PM Gang Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > Posted some minor comments but overall good to have them! > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:27 PM Andrei Tserakhau via dev > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > чт, 25 июн. 2026 г., 16:20 Manu Zhang <[email protected]>: > >> > >> +1 (non-binding). I'm really excited about the use cases it can unblock. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Manu > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 1:27 PM Szehon Ho <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 (binding) > >>> > >>> Went over it, it seems a nice elegant definition. > >>> Thanks > >>> Szehon > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 9:00 PM Anoop Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> +1 (non-binding) > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 7:26 PM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 (binding) > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 3:52 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi everyone, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start a vote to adopt the new expressions spec. This spec > >>>>>> defines the minimal structure and behavior of expressions that Iceberg > >>>>>> formats need to store and exchange. This is intended to clean up > >>>>>> expressions used in the REST catalog spec (exchanging query filters) > >>>>>> and to enable new use cases that require expressions to be stored in > >>>>>> metadata, including expression defaults (`current_timestamp()`) and > >>>>>> `CHECK` constraints (`col < 360.0`). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This spec is PR #16652. Thank you to everyone that has discussed this > >>>>>> in community syncs or reviewed the design doc and PR! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [ ] +1: Adopt the expressions spec > >>>>>> [ ] +0: . . . > >>>>>> [ ] -1: Do not add the spec because . . . > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ryan
