+1 (non-binding)
*Best Regards,*
*Zhenghua Gao*
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 10:11 AM Danny Chan wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Danny Chan
> 在 2019年12月31日 +0800 PM5:09，Forward Xu ，写道：
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to start the vote of FLIP-90 [1] since that we have reached an
> > agreement on
+1 (non-binding)
Best,
Danny Chan
在 2019年12月31日 +0800 PM5:09，Forward Xu ，写道：
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start the vote of FLIP-90 [1] since that we have reached an
> agreement on the design in the discussion thread [2].
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Unless there is an objection,
+1
Thanks a lot for driving this. @ForwardXu
Best,
Hequn
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:07 AM Kurt Young wrote:
> +1
>
> Best,
> Kurt
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 2:59 PM Jingsong Li wrote:
>
> > +1 non-binding. Thanks Forward for driving this.
> >
> > Considering that it is made up of independent
+1
Best,
Kurt
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 2:59 PM Jingsong Li wrote:
> +1 non-binding. Thanks Forward for driving this.
>
> Considering that it is made up of independent and certain things from
> SQL standard and Calcite, I think it can be started as soon as possible.
>
> Best,
> Jingsong Lee
>
> O
+1 from my side and thanks for driving this.
*Best Regards,*
*Zhenghua Gao*
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:10 AM Forward Xu wrote:
> Hi Danny,
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best,
> Forward
>
> Danny Chan 于2020年1月10日周五 上午11:08写道：
>
> > Thanks Forward ~
> > +1 from my side and would review your Calcit
Hi Danny,
Thank you very much.
Best,
Forward
Danny Chan 于2020年1月10日周五 上午11:08写道：
> Thanks Forward ~
> +1 from my side and would review your Calcite PR this weekend :) Overall
> it looks good, and I believe we can merge it soon ~
>
> Best,
> Danny Chan
> 在 2020年1月10日 +0800 AM11:04，Jark Wu ，写道：
>
Thanks Forward ~
+1 from my side and would review your Calcite PR this weekend :) Overall it
looks good, and I believe we can merge it soon ~
Best,
Danny Chan
在 2020年1月10日 +0800 AM11:04，Jark Wu ，写道：
> Thanks Forward for driving this,
>
> The design doc looks very good to me.
> +1 from my side.
>
Thanks Forward for driving this,
The design doc looks very good to me.
+1 from my side.
Best,
Jark
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 20:12, Forward Xu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Listened to the opinion of Timo since the last discussion and updated the
> document [1] Optimized the passing parameters of JSON tabl
Hi all,
Listened to the opinion of Timo since the last discussion and updated the
document [1] Optimized the passing parameters of JSON table API. Added
return type when describing each JSON function. It makes the documentation
more clear. So I again vote of FLIP-90 [2] since that we have reached
Hi all,
Listened to the opinion of timo since the last discussion and updated the
document [1] Optimized the passing parameters of json table api. Added
return type when describing each json function. Makes the documentation
more clear. So i again vote of FLIP-90 [2] since that we have reached an
+1 non-binding. Thanks Forward for driving this.
Considering that it is made up of independent and certain things from
SQL standard and Calcite, I think it can be started as soon as possible.
Best,
Jingsong Lee
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 5:09 PM Forward Xu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start t
Hi all,
I'd like to start the vote of FLIP-90 [1] since that we have reached an
agreement on the design in the discussion thread [2].
This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Unless there is an objection,
I will try to close it by January 3, 2020 08:00 UTC if we have received
sufficient vote
12 matches
Mail list logo
