+1 (binding)

On Tue, Aug 19, 2025, 2:54 PM Marc Cenac <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 11:09 AM Fokko Driesprong <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Op di 19 aug 2025 om 18:08 schreef Steve <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 8:43 AM Russell Spitzer <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 10:28 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 5:23 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 4:50 PM huaxin gao <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 4:33 PM Hussein Awala <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 19, 2025, Steven Wu <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 3:35 PM Prashant Singh <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>>> I propose an update to the Rest Spec to mark 503 as non-retryable
>>>>>>>>>> error code for the Update Table. As it can lead to table corruption
>>>>>>>>>> otherwise. The proposed language in the spec pr also gives rooms for
>>>>>>>>>> servers who still want to use 503 for retries.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For details please check:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13619/files
>>>>>>>>>> Discuss Thread:
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/wg8m058z1jy9dss7jotx6g8h9ko1fxho
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Add these changes to the spec
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>> Prashant
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>

Reply via email to