+1 I think if we keep the backports narrow for 1.10, it would be easy to release and help anyone who hasn't moved forward yet.
-Dan On Sat, Jun 6, 2026, 12:13 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > +1. Thanks Amogh! > > Yufei > > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2026 at 12:08 PM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 for both 1.11.1 and 1.10.3 patch releases. >> >> There is already a milestone for 1.11.1 >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/milestone/63 >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 6, 2026 at 11:10 AM Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hey folks, >>> >>> I'm kicking this thread off to discuss patch releases. I've encountered >>> a bug where the Spark rewrite manifests procedure does not carry over >>> first row IDs correctly. I have a fix PR >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16699> out. >>> >>> Are there any other fixes folks would be interested in including in >>> these patch releases? As a general reminder, patch releases typically cover >>> correctness fixes, security fixes, or addressing significant regressions >>> from the previous version. >>> >>> There's a separate question: should we continue patching v3 metadata >>> correctness fixes in 1.10, or should we just focus on 1.11. I think since >>> we made the claim that we want to have solid v3 support (not >>> necessarily all features, but certainly correctness) in 1.10 there's an >>> argument that we should continue to backport those specific fixes to 1.10. >>> A significant number of clients out there are on 1.10 and I think we should >>> ensure correctness for them and it's probably easier for them to upgrade a >>> patch version than a minor version upgrade. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Amogh Jahagirdar >>> >>
