+1 on documenting on the site, which I don't think it's a 1.0 blocker. It's been added into the release notes[1].
[1]. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JDVdQraoEhOIv7agy7WzIuBQdW0_16jW-DBrnanuW7A/edit?tab=t.0 Yufei On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 11:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks for the heads up, Prashant! > > I agree that it was a good idea to pull Compaction Rollback into 1.0. > > Do we want to document this feature, or just mention it in release notes? > > Cheers, > Dmitri. > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 1:17 PM Prashant Singh > <prashant.si...@snowflake.com.invalid> wrote: > > > Hey folks, > > I want to thank the whole community for jumping in for the reviews of > > Rollback Compaction on conflicts feature here > > < > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/commit/793cf086f1f784c36296b1ea75298a08ce608ef2 > > > > > . > > I am happy to share that it has now merged, since the 1.0 boat has not > > sailed, I cherry-picked the feature to 1.0, it's a clean cherry-pick ! > > I believe it will strongly help in Apache Polaris adoption, and > > sincerely thank everyone who participated ! > > > > Best, > > Prashant Singh > > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 9:13 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Posting here for visibility: > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/0z30f3cfvm41hxlbxgp4fqdpv7mfgnv8 > > > > > > I opened that discussion thread about the new Spark Client plugin. My > > > concern is that the linked > > > PR looks like it may require changing out approach to how we publish > > Maven > > > artifacts > > > for that client.... Therefore, I'd like to have some more clarity on > that > > > issue in order to prevent > > > suddenly changing Maven coordinates right after the 1.0 release. > > > > > > Let's use the other thread for technical discussions. This message is > > only > > > to flag potential > > > 1.0 impact. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 6:13 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > The rename commits( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/commit/ab228afa4d975faabb7aaf1e8abb0804f5b9d353 > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/commit/fccc51ab111b7ee1a0d3c8898e94b0c54bc73d80 > > > > ) > > > > have been cherry-picked to 1.0 branch. > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:51 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > We could re-branch, but folks mentioned there are a few Python > > > > > commits(like https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1810) we are > not > > > > > comfortable with having them in 1.0 branch. > > > > > > > > > > Feel free to bring up a discussion for more PRs you think it's 1.0 > > > > > blockers and needed in 1.0. > > > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:42 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > > di...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi Yufei, > > > > >> > > > > >> As discussed before, I think it is preferable to do the renames > in / > > > > >> before > > > > >> 1.0 because module names affect published Maven artifact names. > > > > >> > > > > >> For that matter, why not re-branch release/1.0.x from `main`? > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks, > > > > >> Dmitri. > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 5:37 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi JB and Dmitri, do we need > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1695 > > > > >> > in > > > > >> > 1.0? We used to agree on bringing it to 1.0 if it's ready, but > I'm > > > OK > > > > >> with > > > > >> > either way. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Yufei > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:31 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1616 was resolved by > > > > #1830, > > > > >> > > #1834 and #1839. And these three commits are cherry-picked to > > 1.0 > > > > >> branch > > > > >> > > already. > > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1881 was just > resolved > > > by > > > > >> > #1889, > > > > >> > > which has been cherry-picked to 1.0 branch. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Yufei > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 12:02 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > > > > >> di...@apache.org> > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Hi Yufei, et al. > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> It looks like only two 1.0 blockers remain: > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1616 > > > > >> > >> [2] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1881 > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> Re: [1] is anybody actively working on it? > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> Also, I believe a lot of relevant changes got merged > > recently... > > > > WDYT > > > > >> > >> about > > > > >> > >> re-branching `release/1.0.x` from `main` after addressing the > > > > >> remaining > > > > >> > >> issues? > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> Thanks, > > > > >> > >> Dmitri. > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 5:39 PM Yufei Gu < > flyrain...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Hi folks, > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > Many users have been asking about the Polaris release, and > I > > > > >> believe > > > > >> > >> it's > > > > >> > >> > critical to have a formal, production-ready 1.0 release > ASAP. > > > > >> Thanks > > > > >> > to > > > > >> > >> the > > > > >> > >> > community’s hard work, we’re very close with a few > remaining > > > > >> blockers > > > > >> > we > > > > >> > >> > need to resolve. > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > To keep things moving, I scheduled a community meeting for > > the > > > > 1.0 > > > > >> > >> release > > > > >> > >> > next Monday at 9 AM PST. At the same time, sharing all > > issues > > > > >> marked > > > > >> > >> with > > > > >> > >> > 1.0 blocker. We could resolve them here if possible. Feel > > free > > > to > > > > >> > chime > > > > >> > >> in, > > > > >> > >> > remove the blocker tag if you think it's not a blocker, or > > pick > > > > any > > > > >> > up. > > > > >> > >> > Thanks a lot in advance! > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > Here is the list: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > - Add CI for Python code ( > > > > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1058 > >#1058), > > > > >> > >> > - Polaris persistence concurrency issues (#777) > > > > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/777> > > > > >> > >> > - Task handling is incomplete (#774) > > > > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/774> > > > > >> > >> > - Generated files in regtests/client/python/polaris > > > (#755) > > > > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/755> > > > > >> > >> > - Resources not properly closed, resource & memory > > leaks > > > > >> (#563) > > > > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/563> > > > > >> > >> > - Make Polaris safe against certain unparseable > > locations > > > > >> (#552) > > > > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/552> > > > > >> > >> > - [BUG] Assumption that cache eviction does not > happen > > > > (#544) > > > > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/544> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > To make it more interactive, you can also comment on the > > google > > > > >> > >> > spreadsheet here: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GyLvp2cdYwioOsBwszNWiphZt_IIdo4LIfsZBFV88mc/edit?usp=sharing > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > Yufei > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
