+1 (binding) Thanks, Prashant Singh
On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:49 AM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:13 AM Sung Yun <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On 2026/06/25 16:48:20 Ryan Blue wrote: >> > +1 (binding) >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 9:24 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > +1(binding) >> > > >> > > Yufei >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 9:13 AM Russell Spitzer < >> [email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> +1 (binding) >> > >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:45 AM Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> +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 >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
