Hi Adnan, I agree with your perspective: the purpose of discussing a design document is to achieve community alignment before beginning the implementation.
I believe it is reasonable to consider that we have reached a consensus on the design and approach. I have reviewed the document, and it looks good to me. We can now move forward with the next step, which involves implementation PRs and dedicated reviews. Thanks! Regards, JB On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 8:49 PM Adnan Hemani via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dmitri, > > My understanding is that we discuss threads in the community before > implementation to ensure alignment on the proposal's direction before > community members put time into the implementation. I'm fully aligned that > the implementation details are always up for discussion (both before or > after a proposal or even before/after a PR :) I just don't want us to > proceed with putting further time/effort in if the community is not aligned > on introducing these endpoints in general. I am claiming "approv[al] by > lazy consensus" for this direction because the doc has been circulating in > the ML for quite long without any objections. > > The old proposal has a different direction altogether and does not align > with where we now want to go with this proposal. I wanted to ensure there > was no confusion between the old (now-abandoned) proposal and the new one. > I-Ting is joining on as a co-author on the new proposal. > > We should definitely discuss this at the next Community Sync! > > Best, > Adnan Hemani > > On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 8:53 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Adnan, > > > > Apologies for the lack of feedback (too many concurrent activities). > > > > However, this is a discussion thread, not a vote on a concrete > > implementation with a timeline. Lack of comment does not mean that people > > approve the design. > > > > If you prefer to proceed to concrete PRs, that would be fine from my POV, > > but please do not assume that PRs will not be challenged on aspects that > > were not already discussed. > > > > I believe it would be preferable to add this to the next Community Sync > > agenda to invigorate the discussion. > > > > Also, I'm not sure what the status is of this document / email thread > with > > respect to I-Ting's old proposal [1]. Why not continue the discussion on > > that thread? WDYT? > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/qqpq5hl1xrq8mwnd7kn4vgt8x9mqtvmg > > > > Cheers, > > Dmitri. > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 1:07 AM Adnan Hemani via dev < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> Since there hasn't been much traffic on this document or email threads, > I > >> will consider the document approved by lazy consensus if there are no > >> further blocking comments by Friday, May 28th. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Best, > >> Adnan Hemani > >> > >> On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 1:49 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Adnan, > >> > > >> > Thanks for putting this proposal together and resurfacing it in a > >> > dedicated thread. > >> > > >> > I did one round of review on the document already, and I think it > would > >> be > >> > great if more folks from the community could take a look and provide > >> > feedback as well. It would be especially helpful to get perspectives > >> from > >> > people working on related areas before implementation starts. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Yufei > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 10:01 PM Adnan Hemani via dev < > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi all, > >> >> > >> >> I wanted to ensure that the OpenLineage proposal I previously posted > >> in a > >> >> different thread [1] was actually being found, given that it was deep > >> into > >> >> the thread. I request the community to review this proposal so we can > >> >> potentially start implementation. > >> >> > >> >> Proposal: > >> >> > >> >> > >> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iOzIuFW66SFL2wZOADD9knMTG21OwY7VmaWVSvMUqQk/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.59bmbnsf0gp1 > >> >> > >> >> Best, > >> >> Adnan Hemani > >> >> > >> >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/1fd6hrvx0v0s5wm6gh74cdo3yn4w1zhx > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >
