I have started a vote on the datafusion dev list to accept the code:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/6k5lws31c61y1lx2s34pxo4lmc7334lr

On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 12:45 PM Andrew Lamb <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks Kevin -- that would be great.
>
> If you start the iceberg vote thread, then someone else can start a vote
> thread for DataFusion to accept it.
>
> Andrew
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 12:02 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Andrew. And thank you Gabriel for porting over the code, I've +1'ed
>> the PR (https://github.com/apache/datafusion-iceberg/pull/1)
>>
>> Happy to help start a vote on the iceberg side.
>>
>> Best,
>> Kevin Liu
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 4:36 AM Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > The new repository is available:
>> > https://github.com/apache/datafusion-iceberg
>> >
>> > Gabriel, can you take a look at making a proposed PR with the content to
>> > move?
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 7:07 AM Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have filed a INFR request to create the new repository:
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-28379
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 8:02 PM Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I will plan to run both voting threads -- I think first we need a
>> repo
>> >> and
>> >> > a PR to vote on. We will work on that starting tomorrow
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 7:52 PM Neelesh Salian <
>> [email protected]
>> >> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Sounds good to me. Feel free to start both threads. Glad to see
>> this
>> >> > going
>> >> > > forward.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 16:46 Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > I think we should do a formal vote in a separate thread -- for
>> both
>> >> > > > communities
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 7:11 PM Neelesh Salian <
>> >> > [email protected]>
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> Yes, to the new repo apache/datafusion-iceberg
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> Question to the folks here: Do we need a formal community vote
>> >> across
>> >> > > >> communities or this thread suffices?
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 03:37 Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> > Thank for all the feedback so far -- unless anyone has
>> concerns,
>> >> I
>> >> > > will
>> >> > > >> > file a request a new repository for apache/datafusion-iceberg
>> >> > tomorrow
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > Andrew
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 5:49 AM Renjie Liu <
>> >> [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > +1 for Andrew's proposal.
>> >> > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > On Sat, Sep 5, 2026 at 1:56 AM Kevin Liu <
>> >> [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > + dev@iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > (lesson learned, emailing 2 devlist might not be the best
>> >> idea
>> >> > > >> > > logistically
>> >> > > >> > > > haha)
>> >> > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2026 at 10:48 AM Kevin Liu <
>> >> > [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > > Thanks for all the great discussions so far. I'm glad we
>> >> > found a
>> >> > > >> > > solution
>> >> > > >> > > > > that benefits the broader ecosystem.
>> >> > > >> > > > > I'm +1 to moving to an apache-governed location,
>> >> > > >> > > > > apache/datafusion-iceberg seems like a great place. I
>> like
>> >> the
>> >> > > >> > process
>> >> > > >> > > > > Andrew proposed, happy to help with the logistics.
>> >> > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > > Best,
>> >> > > >> > > > > Kevin Liu
>> >> > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > > PS I have also removed the iceberg python binding that
>> >> exports
>> >> > > >> > > > > DataFusion's TableProvider, so that's 1 less thing we
>> have
>> >> to
>> >> > > >> worry
>> >> > > >> > > > about.
>> >> > > >> > > > >  https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/3036
>> >> > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2026 at 6:28 AM Gabriel Musat <
>> >> > > >> [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Sounds like a good direction, +1 (non binding)
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> I can help porting the commit history of the
>> >> > DataFusion-Iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > > >> integration to the new repo if PMCs agree.
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> On 2026/09/04 12:27:30 Andrew Lamb wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > I think this is a great idea as well -- thank you for
>> >> > > bringing
>> >> > > >> it
>> >> > > >> > up
>> >> > > >> > > > and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > for the great discussions so far.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > While at VLDB this past week, I spoke to at least
>> three
>> >> > > people
>> >> > > >> > from
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > companies adding Apache Iceberg support to their
>> >> products.
>> >> > > All
>> >> > > >> of
>> >> > > >> > > them
>> >> > > >> > > > >> had
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > to fork iceberg-rust for one reason or another.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > I think we have a huge need to improve our ability to
>> >> work
>> >> > > >> > together
>> >> > > >> > > > and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > accelerate everyone's efforts. Giving the DataFusion
>> >> > > >> integration
>> >> > > >> > > > access
>> >> > > >> > > > >> to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > more expert maintainers with bandwidth I think will
>> help
>> >> > > >> everyone.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > There seems to be consensus that we should move the
>> >> > > integration
>> >> > > >> > code
>> >> > > >> > > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > DataFusion governance, and that it should remain in
>> the
>> >> > ASF,
>> >> > > >> > though
>> >> > > >> > > > some
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > open technical questions remain.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > If that is the case, I propose the following specific
>> >> > > process:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > 1. Create the new gitub repository in Apache for the
>> >> code
>> >> > > (e.g.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > apache/datafusion-iceberg)
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > 2. Create a PR in the new repo with the proposed code
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > 3. Hold a formal vote on the iceberg dev list to move
>> >> the
>> >> > > >> > > integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> code
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > to DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > 4. Hold a formal vote on the DataFusion dev list to
>> >> accept
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > >> new
>> >> > > >> > > > code
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > I am happy to help with the logistics (e.g. ASF INFRA
>> >> > ticket
>> >> > > to
>> >> > > >> > > create
>> >> > > >> > > > >> the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > new repo, votes, etc) but I am not expert enough to
>> >> create
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > proposed
>> >> > > >> > > > >> PR.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > Please let me know your thoughts,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > Andrew
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > (PMC Chair of DataFusion)
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 9:48 PM Renjie Liu <
>> >> > > >> > [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > To add more background about the relationship
>> between
>> >> > comet
>> >> > > >> and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> datafusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > for those who are not familiar with them.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > Apache datafusion is a popular extensible compute
>> >> engine
>> >> > > >> written
>> >> > > >> > > in
>> >> > > >> > > > >> rust.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > Apache comet is an apache spark accelerator
>> builton on
>> >> > > apache
>> >> > > >> > > > >> datafusion,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > and also a subproject of apache datafusion.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > datafusion-iceberg is an apache datafusion
>> extension
>> >> > built
>> >> > > on
>> >> > > >> > > > >> iceberg-rust,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > and comet's iceberg support is built on it.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 9:39 PM Andy Grove <
>> >> > > >> > [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > +1 for moving to DataFusion PMC. The
>> >> iceberg-datafusion
>> >> > > >> > > > integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> is
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > very important for Comet.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 11:42 PM Xuanwo <
>> >> > > [email protected]
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > TBH, I also support moving to the DataFusion
>> PMC.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > - DataFusion is the largest dependency in
>> >> > > >> > iceberg-datafusion.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > - The largest downstream user of
>> >> iceberg-datafusion
>> >> > is
>> >> > > >> > Comet,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> which
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > shares many of the same PMC members as
>> DataFusion.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > It feels natural to be part of the DataFusion
>> >> PMC. As
>> >> > > >> long
>> >> > > >> > as
>> >> > > >> > > DF
>> >> > > >> > > > >> PMC is
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > willing to accept this project, it LGTM.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2026, at 12:03, Renjie Liu
>> wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > I don't think the testing should be a blocker
>> of
>> >> > moving
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > iceberg-datafusion out of iceberg-rust repo. From
>> >> what
>> >> > I
>> >> > > >> > learn,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> most of
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > sqllogictests are in pr of modifying
>> >> iceberg-datafusion
>> >> > > >> > > > integration,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > there
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > are only few cases where we rely on
>> sqllogictests to
>> >> > > verify
>> >> > > >> > > > >> features.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > How would that sound for the `iceberg-rust`
>> >> > community
>> >> > > >> to
>> >> > > >> > > > grant a
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > couple of Apache DataFusion PMCs committer
>> access to
>> >> > the
>> >> > > >> > > > repository,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > limited to the `iceberg-datafusion` crate via a
>> >> > > CODEOWNERS
>> >> > > >> > file,
>> >> > > >> > > > so
>> >> > > >> > > > >> that
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > they can help push reviews and PRs forward
>> >> > independently?
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > I'm not sure if this is feasible, but moving
>> the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> iceberg-datafusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > crate to apache datafusion project sounds a more
>> >> > > reasonable
>> >> > > >> > > > >> approach to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > me.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > It's still governed by Apache, and most of the
>> code
>> >> is
>> >> > > >> related
>> >> > > >> > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > DataFusion, so I think the DataFusion community
>> is
>> >> in a
>> >> > > >> better
>> >> > > >> > > > >> position
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > define the vision and design for it.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 10:45 PM Gabriel Musat
>> <
>> >> > > >> > > > >> [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > Hi everyone,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > Based on these two facts:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > - There's a current reviewer bandwidth problem
>> >> that
>> >> > > hurts
>> >> > > >> > > > >> development
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > velocity of the `iceberg-datafusion` crate
>> currently
>> >> > > hosted
>> >> > > >> > > under
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > `apache/iceberg-rust`.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > - There is value in maintaining the
>> >> > > `iceberg-datafusion`
>> >> > > >> > crate
>> >> > > >> > > > >> inside
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > `apache/iceberg-rust` for testing, design and
>> >> > governance.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > How would that sound for the `iceberg-rust`
>> >> community
>> >> > > to
>> >> > > >> > > grant a
>> >> > > >> > > > >> couple
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > of Apache DataFusion PMCs committer access to the
>> >> > > >> repository,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> limited to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > the `iceberg-datafusion` crate via a CODEOWNERS
>> >> file,
>> >> > so
>> >> > > >> that
>> >> > > >> > > they
>> >> > > >> > > > >> can
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > help
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > push reviews and PRs forward independently?
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > Based on review history, I'd propose Matt
>> >> Butrovich
>> >> > and
>> >> > > >> Tim
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Saucer as
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > two good candidates, but this would be completely
>> >> up to
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > `iceberg-rust`
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > community.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > On 2026/08/26 17:56:19 Shawn Chang wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Hi all,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Summarizing the discussion so far, including
>> a
>> >> few
>> >> > > >> points
>> >> > > >> > > > >> raised in
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > today’s
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > community sync.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > There seems to be general agreement that the
>> >> > current
>> >> > > >> > > > DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > has a velocity/reviewer bandwidth problem,
>> and
>> >> > moving
>> >> > > >> it
>> >> > > >> > to
>> >> > > >> > > a
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > separate
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > repository could help DataFusion contributors
>> >> > iterate
>> >> > > >> more
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > independently.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > At the same time, several open questions
>> remain:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    -
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    Whether repo separation is the right
>> >> solution,
>> >> > > >> versus
>> >> > > >> > > > >> expanding
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    DataFusion reviewer/committer
>> participation
>> >> in
>> >> > > >> > > > iceberg-rust.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    -
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    Where the boundary should be between
>> engine
>> >> > > specific
>> >> > > >> > > > >> integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    Iceberg core functionality, and how to
>> avoid
>> >> > > >> duplicated
>> >> > > >> > > or
>> >> > > >> > > > >> forked
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    implementations. (how to avoid the case
>> where
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Iceberg-datafusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > moving
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    much faster than the core and eventually
>> >> need a
>> >> > > >> forked
>> >> > > >> > > core
>> >> > > >> > > > >> API
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    implementation)
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    -
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    How compatibility and end-to-end
>> correctness
>> >> > > testing
>> >> > > >> > > should
>> >> > > >> > > > >> work
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > across
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    repositories, since iceberg-rust still
>> >> relies on
>> >> > > >> > > DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> for
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    testing.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    -
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    Where the integration should live and how
>> to
>> >> > keep
>> >> > > it
>> >> > > >> > > under
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Apache
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    governance while making it easy for both
>> >> Iceberg
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >    contributors to maintain.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > So I think the main question is not only
>> >> whether to
>> >> > > >> move
>> >> > > >> > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> code,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > but
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > how
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > to improve development velocity without
>> losing
>> >> the
>> >> > > >> close
>> >> > > >> > > > design,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > testing,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > and governance relationship between the
>> engine
>> >> > > >> integration
>> >> > > >> > > and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > iceberg-rust
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > core.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Best,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > Shawn
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:14 AM Manu Zhang <
>> >> > > >> > > > >> [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > +1 moving the DataFusion integration and
>> tests
>> >> > > into a
>> >> > > >> > > > separate
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > apache-governed repository. Can we bring
>> this
>> >> > > >> discussion
>> >> > > >> > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Community
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > Sync[1] this week?
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > 1.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YuGhUdukLP5gGiqCbk0A5_Wifqe2CZWgOd3TbhY3UQg/edit?tab=t.0
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 3:37 PM Renjie Liu
>> <
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> Hi, Matt:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> Thanks for raising this.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> 1) Apache governance:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> I would +1 for putting this in an apache
>> >> repo,
>> >> > for
>> >> > > >> > > example
>> >> > > >> > > > a
>> >> > > >> > > > >> sub
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > repo of
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> datafusion project. Shawn has stated most
>> of
>> >> the
>> >> > > >> > reasons,
>> >> > > >> > > > so
>> >> > > >> > > > >> I
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > don't want
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> to repeat it again.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> 2) Where do tests live/how tests should be
>> >> > > >> maintained?
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> Initially I was thinking about putting
>> >> > > sqllogictest
>> >> > > >> in
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > iceberg-rust, but
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> after second thought I'm leaning towards
>> to
>> >> put
>> >> > it
>> >> > > >> in
>> >> > > >> > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> new repo
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > for two
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> reasons:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> 1. It would be easier for developer of the
>> >> > > >> > > > datafusion-iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> to add tests
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> 2. It would make the dependency graph and
>> >> > version
>> >> > > >> > release
>> >> > > >> > > > >> easier.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Though
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> the dependency is on crate level rather
>> than
>> >> > repo
>> >> > > >> > level,
>> >> > > >> > > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > bi-direction
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> dependency may make version management
>> weird
>> >> and
>> >> > > >> > > difficult.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> The downside of this approach is that
>> it's a
>> >> > > little
>> >> > > >> > > > >> unfriendly for
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> iceberg-rust developers, but I think it's
>> >> less
>> >> > > >> frequent
>> >> > > >> > > for
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > iceberg-rust
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> developers to add sqllogictests compared
>> with
>> >> > > >> > > > >> datafusion-iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > developers.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> 3) Dropping DataFusion dependencies from
>> >> > > >> pyiceberg-core
>> >> > > >> > > > >> binding
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> I'm not quite familiar with this part,
>> but it
>> >> > > sounds
>> >> > > >> > > > >> reasonable to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > me.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> On Sat, Aug 22, 2026 at 6:50 AM Shawn
>> Chang <
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > [email protected]
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Hi Matt,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Thanks for raising this! I generally
>> agree
>> >> that
>> >> > > we
>> >> > > >> can
>> >> > > >> > > > move
>> >> > > >> > > > >> the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> datafusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> integration to a separate repo if that
>> helps
>> >> > more
>> >> > > >> > > > DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > experts to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> work on the integrations
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> On the three considerations:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> 1) Apache governance:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> I think this is my biggest concern so
>> far.
>> >> This
>> >> > > >> could
>> >> > > >> > > not
>> >> > > >> > > > >> only
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > affect
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> contributors, but also whether the
>> >> downstream
>> >> > > users
>> >> > > >> > > could
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > continue
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > to use
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> the integration.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Even if the code remains Apache-licensed,
>> >> > > >> governance,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> release of
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> artifacts,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> and contribution policies can matter for
>> >> > > adoption.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> We should explore more about the option
>> to
>> >> keep
>> >> > > it
>> >> > > >> > under
>> >> > > >> > > > an
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Apache-governed
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> repository.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> 2) Where do tests live/how tests should
>> be
>> >> > > >> maintained?
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> I think this is closely related to the
>> >> > governance
>> >> > > >> > > > question.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> To
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > me,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> broader question is: *how do we make it
>> easy
>> >> > for
>> >> > > >> > people
>> >> > > >> > > > >> from both
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Iceberg Rust and DataFusion communities
>> to
>> >> > > maintain
>> >> > > >> > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > integration?*
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> If we move it to a non-Apache
>> repository, I
>> >> > worry
>> >> > > >> that
>> >> > > >> > > it
>> >> > > >> > > > >> could
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> eventually
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> look somewhat like the current Iceberg
>> Java
>> >> <>
>> >> > > >> Trino
>> >> > > >> > > > >> integration:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> integration primarily lives on the Trino
>> >> side
>> >> > and
>> >> > > >> is
>> >> > > >> > > > >> therefore
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > mostly
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> maintained by people who are already
>> deeply
>> >> > > >> involved
>> >> > > >> > in
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Trino.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> There is an important difference here,
>> >> though.
>> >> > > For
>> >> > > >> > > Iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Java,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Spark is
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> arguably the primary engine integration
>> and
>> >> > has a
>> >> > > >> > large
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> contributor
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> base around it, so having the Trino
>> >> integration
>> >> > > >> > > maintained
>> >> > > >> > > > >> more
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> independently is relatively natural. In
>> >> Iceberg
>> >> > > >> Rust
>> >> > > >> > > > today,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> has
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> a much more central role. It is by far
>> the
>> >> most
>> >> > > >> mature
>> >> > > >> > > > >> engine
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> in the project, is used by our
>> SQLLogicTest
>> >> > > >> > > > infrastructure,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > many
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> users
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> building on Iceberg Rust are also
>> building
>> >> on
>> >> > > >> > > DataFusion.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> The
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > overlap
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> between the two communities is therefore
>> >> much
>> >> > > >> larger.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Because of that, I would prefer that
>> >> extracting
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> integration
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > does not
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> turn it into something that is
>> effectively
>> >> > owned
>> >> > > >> only
>> >> > > >> > by
>> >> > > >> > > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> side. Ideally, both Iceberg Rust
>> >> contributors
>> >> > and
>> >> > > >> > > > DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > contributors
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> should be able to review changes,
>> maintain
>> >> > > >> > > compatibility,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > evolve the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> integration together.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> 3) Dropping DataFusion dependencies from
>> >> > > >> > pyiceberg-core
>> >> > > >> > > > >> binding:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > I
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > think
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> it
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> makes sense to make things simpler and
>> have
>> >> > left
>> >> > > a
>> >> > > >> > > comment
>> >> > > >> > > > >> on the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > github
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> issue with more detailed thoughts:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/3036
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Best,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Shawn
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 11:23 AM Matt
>> >> > Butrovich <
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > [email protected]>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Hello all,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > I've never tried emailing two different
>> >> > project
>> >> > > >> > lists
>> >> > > >> > > at
>> >> > > >> > > > >> once,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > but it
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> was
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > suggested that I do so to try to track
>> the
>> >> > > >> > > conversation
>> >> > > >> > > > >> across
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > both
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > communities. We'll see how this
>> threads on
>> >> > the
>> >> > > >> > mailing
>> >> > > >> > > > >> lists.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > There has been a GitHub Discussion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/discussions/2992#discussioncomment-18082533
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> ,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > a GitHub Issue
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > >
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/3029,
>> >> > and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > it's been a long topic of conversation
>> in
>> >> the
>> >> > > >> past
>> >> > > >> > two
>> >> > > >> > > > >> weeks in
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > both
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > DataFusion and Iceberg Rust Community
>> >> Calls
>> >> > to
>> >> > > >> > discuss
>> >> > > >> > > > >> moving
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > DataFusion integration from Iceberg
>> Rust
>> >> to a
>> >> > > >> > separate
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > repository. I
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> will
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > try to summarize some of the major
>> points
>> >> as
>> >> > I
>> >> > > >> > > > understand
>> >> > > >> > > > >> them,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > but the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > conversations are the ground truth and
>> >> please
>> >> > > >> feel
>> >> > > >> > > free
>> >> > > >> > > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > correct me
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> here.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > The DataFusion TableProvider
>> integration
>> >> in
>> >> > > >> Iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > Rust
>> >> > > >> > > > >> makes
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > a dependency for Iceberg Rust. The
>> >> > integration
>> >> > > >> > exists
>> >> > > >> > > > for
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > multiple
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> reasons:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 1) an engine to execute Iceberg Rust's
>> >> corpus
>> >> > > of
>> >> > > >> > > > >> sqllogictest
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > files
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 2) a TableProvider integration for
>> >> DataFusion
>> >> > > >> users
>> >> > > >> > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> interact
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > with
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Iceberg tables
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Some of the motivations to break out
>> the
>> >> > > >> > integration:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 1) There have been a number of issues
>> and
>> >> > pull
>> >> > > >> > > requests
>> >> > > >> > > > >> against
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > DataFusion TableProvider in Iceberg
>> Rust
>> >> as
>> >> > > users
>> >> > > >> > want
>> >> > > >> > > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> add
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > more
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > features, and they often go stale. I
>> don't
>> >> > > >> believe
>> >> > > >> > > there
>> >> > > >> > > > >> are
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > many
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > committers/PMC members familiar with or
>> >> using
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > >> > > > >> DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> integration.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 2) Iceberg Rust would like to stay as
>> >> > > >> > engine-agnostic
>> >> > > >> > > as
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > possible. A
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > recent DataFusion Ballista integration
>> was
>> >> > > >> declined
>> >> > > >> > > for
>> >> > > >> > > > >> this
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > reason
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/2613
>> >> > > >> .
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 3) Other projects that rely on both
>> >> Iceberg
>> >> > > Rust
>> >> > > >> and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> DataFusion
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > (e.g.,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Comet) are blocked by Iceberg Rust
>> >> upgrading
>> >> > > its
>> >> > > >> > > > >> DataFusion and
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Arrow
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > dependencies before they can upgrade.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Some considerations for both
>> communities:
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 1) Where would this DataFusion
>> >> TableProvider
>> >> > > >> live?
>> >> > > >> > > Most
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > specifically,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > would it be an Apache-governed
>> project? As
>> >> > > folks
>> >> > > >> > like
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > @andygrove
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > point
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> out,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > this can affect whether some community
>> >> > members
>> >> > > >> could
>> >> > > >> > > > >> contribute
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > to it.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > There is a datafusion-contrib org for
>> >> > > >> > > DataFusion-related
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > projects to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> have
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > visibility but no Apache governance,
>> but
>> >> > there
>> >> > > >> may
>> >> > > >> > be
>> >> > > >> > > > >> options
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > put it
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > under an Apache repository.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 2) How would Iceberg Rust continue to
>> run
>> >> > > >> > > sqllogictests
>> >> > > >> > > > >> for
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > regression
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > testing? Does this live in a different
>> >> > > repository
>> >> > > >> > that
>> >> > > >> > > > >> depends
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > on this
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> new
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Iceberg Rust TableProvider crate? Would
>> >> we be
>> >> > > >> able
>> >> > > >> > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> test Pull
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Requests on
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Iceberg Rust with sqllogictests?
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > 3) @kevinqliu is familiar with the
>> Python
>> >> > > >> bindings
>> >> > > >> > in
>> >> > > >> > > > >> Iceberg
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Rust,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> and I
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > believe that DataFusion dependency
>> might
>> >> be
>> >> > > >> removed
>> >> > > >> > as
>> >> > > >> > > > >> well,
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > but
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > that
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> is
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > not the core focus of this
>> conversation.
>> >> He
>> >> > has
>> >> > > >> also
>> >> > > >> > > > >> proposed
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > removing
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> that
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > and using the DataFusion Python
>> bindings
>> >> > > >> directly.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > I'm sure I'm forgetting things, but
>> this
>> >> > email
>> >> > > is
>> >> > > >> > long
>> >> > > >> > > > >> enough.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > Thanks everyone for the discussion thus
>> >> far,
>> >> > > and
>> >> > > >> > > looking
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > forward
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > to
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> more
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > input on this.
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> > -Matt
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > Xuanwo
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > https://xuanwo.io/
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > > >> > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> >> > [email protected]
>> >> > > >> > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> >> > > [email protected]
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >> > > >
>> >> > > >> > >
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to