+1 (binding) On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 1:58 PM Matt Topol <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (binding) > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026, 2:52 PM Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +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 >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>
