still need some help on reviewing the PR that reverted/removed the JSON
spec for content file and file scan task.
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/9771/files
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 4:01 PM Jack Ye wrote:
> I see. I was asking for the devlist discussion history, because this is
> related
I see. I was asking for the devlist discussion history, because this is
related to our proposal discussion. I think we should establish some rules
like "no change should be added to any spec without devlist discussions",
and then we can use this rule to justify the removal of this spec change
that
here is the PR for spec update: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/9771
> Was there any prior discussions on devlist for adding it to the spec?
Jack, there is no separate discussion on adding it to the spec. It was a
mistake on my part. it was added in the PR from 8 months ago as linked.
[2]
I think I would probably remove it from the spec with a note and a pointer
to the class that implements it.
Right now we don't have anyone that I'm aware of relying on this
serialization format across engines so it isn't a format-level contract.
Though we should note that Flink relies on the forma
Was there any prior discussions on devlist for adding it to the spec? Could
you help link those conversations?
Thanks,
Jack Ye
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 1:05 PM Steven Wu wrote:
>
> In the recent PR review [1], Ryan and emkornfield has raised a question
> why file scan task JSON serialization was
In the recent PR review [1], Ryan and emkornfield has raised a question why
file scan task JSON serialization was added to the table spec [2]. We seems
to have a consensus that it *shouldn't* have been added to the table spec.
Now the question is what's the process of removing an invalid section f
