Hi Sung, Thanks for pushing this work forward!
I commented on PR 4409 in GH. In general I like the direction this PR is going. Still, I think some more fine-tuning would improve interface clarity (as commented in GH). Thanks, Dmitri. On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 8:46 AM Sung Yun <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dmitri, Yufei, > > Thank you for keeping the discussion going on the other thread [1]. I’m > following up here on the proposal to fold this into the new authorization > SPI work. > > Based on feedback from the Polaris Community Authorization Sync on May 7 > [2], I put together a PR [3] that changes the shape of the new authorize > SPI and AuthorizationRequest so the request model makes the authorization > target shape more explicit inside PolarisAuthorizer. > > At a high level, the PR: > - introduces batch authorize APIs that take List<AuthorizationRequest> > - removes PolarisPrincipal from AuthorizationRequest, so caller context is > not duplicated across batch requests > - reworks AuthorizationRequest into a sealed hierarchy with explicit > request shapes: > - SingleTargetAuthorizationRequest > - PairwiseTargetAuthorizationRequest > - TargetlessAuthorizationRequest > > This is an SPI-breaking proposal, but since the new SPI is not yet used by > the main request flow, I believe this is still a safe point to make the > change. > > I’d appreciate feedback on whether this request shape is a better fit for > the new SPI, especially given the earlier concern that AuthorizationRequest > should make resource shape more explicit. > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/o5hntqfvfhn5z9t78480nplpypddg200 > [2] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C_SSaZH1i83UUGXrnVBur1fR_FHKYWZ75ISFfcb3kns/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.wodibvbtg7qj > [3] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4409 > > On 2026/04/06 20:23:11 Yufei Gu wrote: > > Given that, let's keep them separate. See you guys tomorrow. > > > > Yufei > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 11:43 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I may not be available for the entire Community Sprint time slot > tomorrow. > > > I'd personally prefer to keep the old Authorization meeting time and > video > > > call format. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Dmitiri. > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 2:05 PM Sung Yun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Yufei, > > > > > > > > That's a good suggestion - I’m open to merging them. That said, > since we > > > > already have a dedicated and well-established sync for > Authorization, it > > > > might be better to use the Community Sprint for other topics and help > > > > create structure around those discussions. > > > > > > > > I’m fine either way. Happy to align with what works best for the > group. > > > > > > > > Sung > > > > > > > > On 2026/04/06 17:59:32 Yufei Gu wrote: > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > > > We have a Polaris Community Spring tomorrow afternoon. Can we > merge the > > > > > morning's Polaris Authorizer Sync Meeting into the Sprint? > > > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 11:30 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Sung, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for driving this call! I think today's session was very > useful > > > > and > > > > > > productive. > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to sync up with everyone: I believe we will continue > working on > > > > code > > > > > > refactorings (SPI PRs) between those community calls and discuss > > > > > > specific code-level issues via email or GH comments. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 8:23 AM Sung Yun <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot JB! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Confirming that I'm able to see the new recurring sync on my > Google > > > > > > > calendar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm looking forward to syncing up with everyone tomorrow at > 1pm ET > > > / > > > > 10am > > > > > > > PT. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > Sung > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2026/03/23 09:55:47 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > > > > > > > The invite has been sent. Anyone member of the Polaris Google > > > Group > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > receive it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the invite details: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Polaris Authorizer Sync Meeting > > > > > > > > 10am PT > > > > > > > > Video call link: https://meet.google.com/hyj-fcdm-ydx > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NB: I'm creating a Calendar that will create a PR to share > on the > > > > > > > website. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 10:51 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Sung, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I propose moving the sync to 10:00 AM PT (starting March > 24th) > > > to > > > > > > > avoid a > > > > > > > > > conflict with the Iceberg meeting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sending the calendar invitation now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:52 AM Sung Yun < > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hi JB, that'll be fantastic. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> It looks like we have enough members interested in > joining the > > > > sync. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Could I ask for your help in adding a meeting to the > Polaris > > > > Agenda > > > > > > > group > > > > > > > > >> [1], for Tuesdays at 12:00 PM ET (9:00 AM PT), starting > March > > > > 24th? > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Thanks a lot JB. And here's the Google Doc [2] I created > where > > > > we > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > >> keep track of the discussion topics for the sync as well. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Looking forward to discussing auth with everyone. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Sung > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> [1] > https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/polaris-community-sync > > > > > > > > >> [2] > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C_SSaZH1i83UUGXrnVBur1fR_FHKYWZ75ISFfcb3kns/edit?tab=t.0 > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> On 2026/03/20 14:15:40 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > Hi > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > As discussed together, I think it's a great idea. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > I'm happy to add a meeting (recorded) on the Polaris > agenda > > > > > > (Google > > > > > > > > >> Group). > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > On a related topic, I will create a PR to add a Calendar > > > with > > > > all > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > >> > meetings on our website. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Regards > > > > > > > > >> > JB > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 7:30 PM Sung Yun < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Following the discussion in the Polaris community > sync, it > > > > seems > > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > >> we > > > > > > > > >> > > could benefit from a dedicated forum to work through > the > > > > > > > > >> PolarisAuthorizer > > > > > > > > >> > > SPI and related questions. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Some topics we can start with include: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > - Decoupling Polaris resolution and privilege from > Polaris > > > > > > > > >> authorization > > > > > > > > >> > > - Mixed-mode authorization (continuing to use native > > > > principals > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > >> grants > > > > > > > > >> > > after decoupling) > > > > > > > > >> > > - Contract with external authorizers for Polaris > (e.g., > > > > > > > > >> > > PolarisAuthorizableOperation, PolarisEntityType) > > > > > > > > >> > > - Incorporating additional authorization context > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > I’d like to propose a fortnightly authorization sync > to > > > > drive > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > >> topics > > > > > > > > >> > > forward. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > I’m thinking Tuesdays at 12:00 PM ET (9:00 AM PT), > > > starting > > > > > > March > > > > > > > 25 > > > > > > > > >> (the > > > > > > > > >> > > second sequence will be April 7th, and on). I’m happy > to > > > > send > > > > > > out > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > >> > > calendar invite if there is general support in the > > > > community on > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> idea. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Sung > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
