+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 2:20 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (binding) > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 1:58 PM Matt Topol <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026, 2:52 PM Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 11:53 AM Prashant Singh < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 (binding) >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Prashant Singh >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:49 AM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 (binding) >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:13 AM Sung Yun <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 (binding) >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2026/06/25 16:48:20 Ryan Blue wrote: >>>>>> > +1 (binding) >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 9:24 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > +1(binding) >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > Yufei >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 9:13 AM Russell Spitzer < >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> > > wrote: >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> +1 (binding) >>>>>> > >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:45 AM Alexandre Dutra < >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> > >> wrote: >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 5:03 PM Gang Wu <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> > >>> > +1 (non-binding) >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> > >>> > Posted some minor comments but overall good to have them! >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> > >>> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:27 PM Andrei Tserakhau via dev >>>>>> > >>> > <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> > >>> > > >>>>>> > >>> > > +1 (non-binding) >>>>>> > >>> > > >>>>>> > >>> > > чт, 25 июн. 2026 г., 16:20 Manu Zhang < >>>>>> [email protected]>: >>>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>>> > >>> > >> +1 (non-binding). I'm really excited about the use cases >>>>>> it can >>>>>> > >>> unblock. >>>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>>> > >>> > >> Thanks, >>>>>> > >>> > >> Manu >>>>>> > >>> > >> >>>>>> > >>> > >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 1:27 PM Szehon Ho < >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> > >>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>> +1 (binding) >>>>>> > >>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>> Went over it, it seems a nice elegant definition. >>>>>> > >>> > >>> Thanks >>>>>> > >>> > >>> Szehon >>>>>> > >>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 9:00 PM Anoop Johnson < >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> > >>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>> > >>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>> > >>> > >>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 7:26 PM Steven Wu < >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> > >>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>> +1 (binding) >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 3:52 PM Ryan Blue < >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> > >>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> I'd like to start a vote to adopt the new expressions >>>>>> spec. >>>>>> > >>> This spec defines the minimal structure and behavior of >>>>>> expressions that >>>>>> > >>> Iceberg formats need to store and exchange. This is intended to >>>>>> clean up >>>>>> > >>> expressions used in the REST catalog spec (exchanging query >>>>>> filters) and to >>>>>> > >>> enable new use cases that require expressions to be stored in >>>>>> metadata, >>>>>> > >>> including expression defaults (`current_timestamp()`) and >>>>>> `CHECK` >>>>>> > >>> constraints (`col < 360.0`). >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> This spec is PR #16652. Thank you to everyone that has >>>>>> > >>> discussed this in community syncs or reviewed the design doc >>>>>> and PR! >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours: >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> [ ] +1: Adopt the expressions spec >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> [ ] +0: . . . >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> [ ] -1: Do not add the spec because . . . >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>> > >>>>>> Ryan >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> -- John Zhuge
