Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

Hi Honah and Eduard, Following up on the test failures you both encountered, I opened apache/iceberg-python issues #1409 to track this. Thanks for taking the time to verify the release! Best, Kevin Liu On Fri, Dec 6, 2024 at 9:41 AM Kevin Li

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

Thanks everyone for voting! The 72 hours have passed, and a minimum of 3 binding votes have been cast: - +1: 3 (binding), 2 (non-binding) - +0: 0 - -1: 0 The release candidate has been officially accepted as *PyIceberg 0.8.1*. Thank you again for your participation! The announcement will be sent o

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

+1 (binding) but I've also had the same tests fail that Honah mentioned earlier (which are due to deprecated dependencies) On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 3:52 AM Sung Yun wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Checked signatures, checksums and validated license headers. > > Ran the coverage tests using python3.1

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

+1 (non-binding) Checked signatures, checksums and validated license headers. Ran the coverage tests using python3.12. Sung On 2024/12/03 21:37:48 Fokko Driesprong wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Checked checksums, signatures, and licenses. > > Honah, there are some open PRs to bump to the latest d

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

+1 (binding) Checked checksums, signatures, and licenses. Honah, there are some open PRs to bump to the latest dependencies (e.g. Pandas 2.2.3 ), except for the warning, everything works well. Would be good to get those bumped at some point :)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

+1 (binding) Thanks for running the release, Kevin! - Verified signatures/checksum/license - Ran tests "make test-coverage" in python 3.11 I noticed that when running tests with latest dependencies: - pandas==2.2.3 - pyspark==3.5.4 - getdaft==0.3.15 some tests failed due to the following warning

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

Hi Kevin, Yes, that approach sounds good to me as well. And thanks for the explanation! Sung On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 8:17 PM Kevin Liu wrote: > Hey Sung, > > Good point. For context, I accidentally generated and uploaded to PyPi a > version with `0.8.1` instead of `0.8.1rc1`. Fokko helped me y

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

Hey Sung, Good point. For context, I accidentally generated and uploaded to PyPi a version with `0.8.1` instead of `0.8.1rc1`. Fokko helped me yank that version. https://pypi.org/project/pyiceberg/0.8.1/ If this RC passes, we can un-yank and reuse the currently uploaded version. Otherwise, I can

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.8.1rc1

Hi Kevin, Thank you so much for working on this release! I noticed this morning that PyIceberg 0.8.1 was released and yanked[1] this morning. Similar to how we had handled it when this had happened last time, I think this would mean that we would need to now move on to the next version and publis