+1 (nb) Thanks, Steve Zhang
> On Feb 24, 2025, at 6:32 PM, Renjie Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 7:00 AM Szehon Ho <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> +1 >> >> Thanks >> Szehon >> >> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 2:52 PM [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 12:26 PM Daniel Weeks <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025, 11:00 AM Russell Spitzer <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 12:55 PM Fokko Driesprong <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>> >>>>>> Recently, there was confusion >>>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/w403yzmpy9n9swcpwl2dcj2skdc0dskg> about >>>>>> valid values for the current-snapshot-id, which led to implementation >>>>>> notes <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12334> in the spec. Thanks >>>>>> for the reviews so far and to Daniel for the additional historical >>>>>> context on snapshot ID generation. Since there were a couple of reviews, >>>>>> and everything has been addressed, I would like to raise a vote to add >>>>>> this to the spec. >>>>>> >>>>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. >>>>>> >>>>>> [ ] +1 Add the implementation notes to the spec >>>>>> [ ] +0 >>>>>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>> Fokko
