I had a comment about the exception offsets, but +1 (binding) from me. Thanks, Amogh Jahagirdar
On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 6:08 PM Micah Kornfield <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (non-binding for me). > > I left some comments that I think might help with clarity for > implementers. > > Ryan, given the limited nature of the vote, what do you see as the > decision factors for actually using this? > > Cheers, > Micah > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 4:21 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 from me >> >> On Thu, Jun 4, 2026 at 9:01 AM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I mentioned in the thread on adding a bitmap format for small bitmaps >>> that I think the next steps are to get a draft spec into git (PR #16518 >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16518>) and then iterate on it >>> and implementations. That will give us more information to move forward >>> with the Mumbling bitmap format in v4 metadata or not. >>> >>> This vote is to add the spec to version control. It does not mean that >>> we are using the format in tables or other places. Those uses will be >>> covered by future votes. >>> >>> Please vote in the next 72 hours: >>> >>> [ ] +1: Add the Mumbling bitmap spec >>> [ ] +0: . . . >>> [ ] -1: Do not add the spec to git because . . . >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Ryan >>> >>
