Re: [DISCUSS] Describing REST Server capabilities

Hi everyone, A few considerations: - I think we should explicitly state which client/service interoperability we are aiming for. I expect that we want to support both old client -> new server, and new client -> old server communications. - I agree with Jack, that we should think about versions in

Re: Iceberg Catalog Syncs Invite

The google group is purely for subscribing to the meeting. We do not plan to use it for discussions. -Jack On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, 10:33 PM Xuanwo wrote: > Hi, Jack Ye > > Thank you for setting up the Iceberg Catalog Sync; I'm eager to > participate. > > However, it feels a bit odd that we are us

Re: Iceberg Catalog Syncs Invite

Hi, Jack Ye Thank you for setting up the Iceberg Catalog Sync; I'm eager to participate. However, it feels a bit odd that we are using a new Google Group mailing list instead of the ASF Mailing List. Is there a reason for this or do we need to setup a new list here? On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, at 13

Re: Iceberg Catalog Syncs Invite

Subscribed and verified that all the links work fine. Thanks for organizing this, Jack. - Ajantha On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:42 AM Jack Ye wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Sorry for the wait, here is the invite information about the Iceberg > catalog sync. Let me know if the following links work, I a

Iceberg Catalog Syncs Invite

Hi everyone, Sorry for the wait, here is the invite information about the Iceberg catalog sync. Let me know if the following links work, I am not very familiar with using Google Suite. Google group: https://groups.google.com/g/iceberg-catalog-sync Google calendar: https://calendar.google.com/cal

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

Thanks, Jack, for taking the time to put this initiative together. I will borrow Julian Hyde’s example of the blind men and the elephant [1]: “Do you know the story of the blind men and the elephant? Each man touches a different part of the elephant, so they assume they are touching a different a

Re: [DISCUSS] Describing REST Server capabilities

Hi everyone, I feel I do not see a good answer to why not just simply version each API? When using tag, it means I have to offer capabilities per-tagged group. However, I could for example just offer loadTable and nothing else in a catalog, and that should still be Iceberg REST compliant. And I th

Re: [INFO] Preparing the Apache Iceberg 1.6.0 release

Hey JB, Thanks for the update. The Gradle upgrade is in, thanks again for working on that. We also need to update the shadow plugin to get the Parquet 1.14.1 PR

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

Hi everyone, Thanks Jack, for your efforts in the proposed bylaws. This initiative not only provides a valuable foundation but also prompts us to thoroughly examine our current operations and ensure they align with our collective objectives. An area I like for discussion is the management of prop

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

Thanks for bringing this up Jack. I think having more established rules specifically for the project is probably a good thing to make sure outsiders see a path to becoming more included in the project. I'm especially interested in the proposals for more actively including newer contributors from d

[Discussion] Apache Iceberg Guidelines for Committership and PMC Membership

Hi everyone, Here is a draft proposal for the guidelines for committership and PMC membership: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ka0F9Cn0QeL3IJbds3aGyz3XLnzlS5khoY5B8yogA8E/edit The guideline is trying to provide some concrete directions, without being too specific. Not sure if I did a good jo

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

Thank you Jack for wrangling this. These conversations are never easy, but I'm glad to see this happening. As a relative newcomer to the Iceberg effort, I am personally supportive of the idea of bylaws. I agree with Ryan that it's important to not overspecify and overindex on processes, but I do th

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

Thanks everyone for the insightful comments! I have raised a separate thread for the initial trimmed down version of the proposal. To summarize, here are the discussion points we will have once the initial version is passed: 1. guidelines for committership and PMC membership 2. active, inactive, e

[Discussion] Apache Iceberg Community Guideline - Initial Version

Hi everyone, Thanks for the feedback in the bylaws document discussion thread! As suggested, I have removed all the topics that require further debates, and created this new doc to serve as the initial version that we can review and later vote. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S3igb5NqSlYE3dq_

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

Hi everyone, Thanks to everyone for the valuable points raised recently. I’m in favor of having bylaws that contain details on how the Iceberg community works, especially regarding “Decisions,” as this will provide clarity and guidance for all members. I would like to share some of my thoughts o

Re: [INFO] Preparing the Apache Iceberg 1.6.0 release

Ah by the way, I also plan to finalize Avro releases to update in iceberg (especially for both Java and rust). I will keep you posted. Regards JB Le mar. 25 juin 2024 à 15:47, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > Hi folks, > > I'm happy to share that we fixed the gradle-revapi with Gradle 8.2+ > a

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

Hi, everyone. Thank Jack Ye to start this hard work first. I want to emphasize that ONE being seen as the project leader is not about holding the position of PMC Chair, but rather due to his contributions. I'm more interested in lowering the entry requirements for committers and PMC members t

Re: [Early Feedback] Variant and Subcolumnarization Support

Hey Aihua and Tyler, Thanks again for raising this. I reviewed the proposal and it looks good, also thanks to everyone for jumping in and providing feedback. Looking at the proposal and comments, I think the biggest open issue that needs to be decided is Subcolumnarization vs native type

Re: [INFO] Preparing the Apache Iceberg 1.6.0 release

Hi folks, I'm happy to share that we fixed the gradle-revapi with Gradle 8.2+ and we did a fork and a new release. It means that we will be able to upgrade to Gradle 8.8 for iceberg-java 1.6.0 release (see https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/8486). After this merge, we will be able to merge Par

Re: Feedback Collection: Bylaws in Iceberg

On 2024/06/24 07:38:47 Jack Ye wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I propose that we put up a bylaws document like other projects such as > Apache Hadoop and Apache ORC. I think this will put people at peace and > remove many people's concerns about the future of the project and its > vendor-neutral stan