Hi all, Just to clarify: ATR is currently available for internal ASF feedback only. The project is in alpha development and subject to significant changes. There is a test instance to "play" with the ATR release process. I think the Polaris project should really help the ATR project and I'm sure that Polaris' (semi) automated release process would work fine with ATR.
Generic tables have documented limitations [1], so I think we should have a discussion about how the feature can be evolved. It would be interesting to know what users think about it, but I couldn't find any user feedback on generic tables on the mailing list or in GH issues. The JDBC schema compatibility is already handled in the code itself, at least that's my understanding. Last but not least, thanks Pierre for being the release manager for 1.3.0! Robert [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/blob/f056e22f7f3a7c53e233bef1b88d204d6a8e4d79/site/content/in-dev/unreleased/generic-table.md?plain=1#L162-L169 On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 10:18 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Thanks Pierre for volunteering! +1 to giving the ATR tool a try. It’d be > great to see how far we can automate the process. BTW, could anyone share > information about the Apache ATR tool? I remember we used to work on a tool > dedicated to Polaris. I assume Apache ATR is a different tool. > > One thing to watch for in 1.3 is whether we want to remove the beta label > for Generic Table. The feature has been stable for a while and is used in > multiple integrations. We've postponed it for 2 releases(1.1 and 1.2). That > of course deserves a separate discussion. > > It's also worth monitoring Postgres DB schema changes between 1.2 and 1.3, > since even small updates could break upgrades. We need to handle those > carefully. > > Otherwise, it looks good to start planning the branch cut and RC timing. > > Yufei > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 9:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thanks for volunteering, Pierre! > > > > As for the ATR tool, I think it would be great to give it a try with > > Polaris 1.3.0. If it becomes too much of an overhead we can always go back > > to our usual release process. I think we're not required to release via ATR > > if/when we start a trial :) > > > > Cheers, > > Dmitri. > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 3:50 AM Pierre Laporte <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I would like to volunteer for that so that I can run the workflows and > > > verify everything is in order for an automated release. > > > > > > I am not certain how this will play with the ATR tool. It might be too > > > early to sign up for that. Wdyt? > > > -- > > > > > > Pierre > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 5:33 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > I think it's time to start thinking/prep 1.3.0-incubating release. > > > > > > > > Who would volunteer to be release manager ? > > > > > > > > I think it would be great to join the Apache ATR tool. I would be > > > > happy to help the release manager in this regard. > > > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > JB > > > > > > > > >
