I'm not seeing any strong feelings on this so I'm going to go ahead and merge. If anyone else sees issues we can always address this in a follow up.
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 6:07 PM Steven Wu <stevenz...@gmail.com> wrote: > It seems that the PR has made two valid arguments to support to change of > public scope > * identity transform builder is the only one where targetName builder is > not public > * handle the partition column rename use case > > So it seems reasonable to me. > > > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 2:49 PM Russell Spitzer <russell.spit...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Y'all >> >> We've been considering making a change to the Identity Partition >> Transform >> builder. Unlikely all of the other builders, Identity doesn't allow you >> to make >> an Identity Transform with a name different from the column you are >> transforming. >> >> We want to be able to construct in memory a TableMetadata object which >> matches >> an existing Table without going through deserialization of a Json object >> and >> this is one of the few places where we can't actually legally build the >> metadata which >> matches the Json on disk. Meaning if you have a Table whose source column >> of an >> identity was changed, it is impossible to build metadata from the >> TableMetadata.Builder >> which matches that object. >> >> I was wondering if anyone has feelings about making the constructor >> public or if >> anyone knows of any reasons why making this public could cause problems. >> >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12943 >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12975 >> >> I was hypothesizing that this relates to Hive partition mapping but I >> can't think >> of another reason it might matter. >> >> Thanks for reading and I'm eager to hear anyones thoughts, >> Russ >> >
