+1 (non-binding) on these spec clarifications Thanks, Amogh Jahagirdar
On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 5:08 PM Steven Wu <stevenz...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am +1 for the spec clarifications. > > I have left some comments for the time travel PR. we can discuss the > details in the PR itself before merging. In particular, I am wondering if > the time travel clarification can be add to the existing `snapshots` > section of the spec (instead of adding a new `implementation notes` section) > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 3:54 PM Ryan Blue <b...@databricks.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Thanks, Micah! >> >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (non binding) >>> >>> Thanks ! >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 10:35 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > I'd like to raise on modifying the table specification with >>> clarifications on time travel and equality deletes [1][2]. The PRs have >>> links to prior mailing list discussions where there was apparent consensus >>> that these were the expectations for functionality. >>> > >>> > Possible votes: >>> > [ ] +1 Merge the PRs >>> > [ ] +0 >>> > [ ] -1 Do not merge the PRs because ... >>> > >>> > The vote will remain open for at least 72 hours. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Micah >>> > >>> > [1] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/8982 >>> > [2] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/8981 >>> >> >> >> -- >> Ryan Blue >> Databricks >> >
