With 13 +1 votes (9 binding) and no -1 or +0 votes, this passes. Thanks, everyone!
Ryan On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 2:02 PM huaxin gao <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 1:26 PM Prashant Singh <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1 for getting started with the draft, thanks Ryan ! >> >> Best, >> Prashant >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 1:22 PM Steve <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +1 (non-binding) >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 12:08 PM Szehon Ho <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > +1 (binding) >>> > >>> > Thanks >>> > Szehon >>> > >>> > On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 11:24 AM Fokko Driesprong <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> +1 (binding) >>> >> >>> >> On 2026/06/09 17:12:39 Russell Spitzer wrote: >>> >> > +1 for having the draft up >>> >> > >>> >> > On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 11:32 AM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > > +1 (binding) >>> >> > > >>> >> > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 9:05 AM Anoop Johnson <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> > > >>> >> > >> I'm +1 (non-binding) to get the spec in. >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 8:18 PM Eduard Tudenhöfner < >>> >> > >> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >>> +1 (binding) for adding this to version control >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 1:30 PM Péter Váry < >>> [email protected]> >>> >> > >>> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>>> Seems like a good way forward, even if we need to iron out the >>> details. >>> >> > >>>> We will need a good compression for the delete vectors if we >>> would like >>> >> > >>>> to store then in the metadata files. >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> +1 for adding an initial draft >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2026. >>> jún. 9., >>> >> > >>>> K, 2:47): >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > >>>>> 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 >>> >> > >>>>>>>> >>> >> > >>>>>>> >>> >> > >>> >>
