+1 (non-binding)

On Sun, Jun 28, 2026 at 8:35 AM Junwang Zhao <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> It would be great if the minor comments could be addressed, but
> they're not blocking.
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2026 at 10:38 PM Aihua Xu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2026 at 3:03 AM Christian Thiel <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 (non-binding)
> >>
> >> vaquar khan <[email protected]> schrieb am Sa. 27. Juni 2026 um
> 07:31:
> >>>
> >>> +1 (non-binding)
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Viquar Khan
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 at 21:49, huaxin gao <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> +1 (non-binding)
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2026 at 6:50 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  +1 (non binding)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards
> >>>>> JB
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 12:52 AM 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
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
> Junwang Zhao
>

Reply via email to