+1 (non-binding) On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 7:39 AM Gang Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 5:38 AM Steve <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 1:38 PM huaxin gao <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > +1 (non-binding) >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 1:34 PM Fokko Driesprong <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> +1 (binding) >> >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Fokko >> >> >> >> On 2026/06/11 20:25:43 Szehon Ho wrote: >> >> > +1 (binding) >> >> > Thanks >> >> > Szehon >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 11:31 AM Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > +1 (binding) >> >> > > >> >> > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 11:00 AM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > >> +1 binding >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Thank you! >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 9:47 AM Russell Spitzer < >> >> > >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> > >>> +1 (binding) - Also I don't think we really need a vote on this >> since >> >> > >>> it should be what is already happening :) But no problem doing >> one. What we >> >> > >>> really need is more committer approvals on the pr >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 9:32 AM Junwang Zhao <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>>> +1 (non-binding) >> >> > >>>> >> >> > >>>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 5:22 PM Andrei Tserakhau via dev >> >> > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > Hi all, >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > Following the discussion thread [1], I'd like to call a vote >> on the >> >> > >>>> > spec clarification in PR #16446 [2]. >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > Summary of the change: >> >> > >>>> > - The `day` partition transform's result type in the >> transform table >> >> > >>>> is >> >> > >>>> > changed from `int` to `date`, matching the long-standing >> default >> >> > >>>> > behavior of Java, PyIceberg, Rust, and C++ (all of which >> write the >> >> > >>>> > Avro `date` logical type in manifests). >> >> > >>>> > - A note is added clarifying that readers must also accept >> plain `int` >> >> > >>>> > values for the `day` transform, interpreting each as a date >> in days >> >> > >>>> > since 1970-01-01. (Reader tolerance is also inherited from >> the Avro >> >> > >>>> > spec, which requires readers to ignore unrecognized >> logical-type >> >> > >>>> > annotations.) >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > This is a clarification, not a behavioral change: the physical >> >> > >>>> > representation (a 4-byte day count) is unchanged, and no >> existing >> >> > >>>> > manifests are affected. It documents what implementations >> already do >> >> > >>>> > and resolves an ambiguity that has been re-litigated several >> times >> >> > >>>> > (issue #16414 [3], and most recently a real interop failure in >> >> > >>>> > iceberg-go #1176 [4]). >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > Per the contributor guide, changes under format/ require a >> vote even >> >> > >>>> > for clarifications, hence this thread. >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > [ ] +1 Approve the spec clarification >> >> > >>>> > [ ] +0 >> >> > >>>> > [ ] -1 Do not approve (please provide reasons) >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > [1] >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/wnhvdmwc3b1dxc2ogk7po682pky12cps >> >> > >>>> > [2] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16446 >> >> > >>>> > [3] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/16414 >> >> > >>>> > [4] https://github.com/apache/iceberg-go/pull/1176 >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > Here's my +1 (non-binding). >> >> > >>>> > >> >> > >>>> > Best, >> >> > >>>> > Andrei >> >> > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> > >>>> -- >> >> > >>>> Regards >> >> > >>>> Junwang Zhao >> >> > >>>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >
