Hi all, With one binding -1, the vote does not pass. I will prepare the requested changes and start another vote thread when we're ready.
Thanks, Alex On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 11:12 PM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> wrote: > > -1 (but I think we can address the concern easily) > > I just added a comment to the PR that's a blocker for me. We introduced an > explicit enumeration of cloud providers which I strongly oppose codifying in > the spec. > > That limits other providers from leveraging the signing portion of the spec > without a spec change and is unnecessarily strict. > > This should be a simple update to address, but I can't support this change > until we remove that. > > -Dan > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 8:44 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> +1 (non binding) >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 7:33 AM Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> This is a second vote attempt in order to adopt the promotion of the >>> remote signing endpoint to the main REST spec. >>> >>> Related links: >>> >>> ML thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/2kqdqb46j7jww36wwg4txv6pl2hqq9w7 >>> PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15450 >>> >>> Please vote within the next 72 hours. >>> >>> [ ] +1 Adopt the promotion of the remote signing endpoint to the main REST >>> spec >>> [ ] +0 >>> [ ] -1 Do not adopt, please explain why >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Alex
