+1 (binding) On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 11:53 AM Prashant Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
> +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 >>> > >>> >>> > >> >>> > >>> >>
