+1 (binding) On Tue, Oct 6, 2026 at 10:26 AM huaxin gao <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) > > On Tue, Oct 6, 2026 at 10:17 AM Zheng Hu via dev <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> +1 (binding) >> >> btw, I left few comments in the PR >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/17727, and seems like there are >> few CVE scanining failures, are we blocking on that ? >> >> On Tue, Oct 6, 2026 at 8:26 AM Gang Wu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2026 at 3:18 PM Eduard Tudenhöfner < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 (binding) >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2026 at 12:29 AM Szehon Ho <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Szehon >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 5, 2026 at 2:44 PM Jones, Danny via dev < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for driving standardization here! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Danny >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From: *Neelesh Salian <[email protected]> >>>>>> *Reply to: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>>> *Date: *Monday, 5 October 2026 at 22:31 >>>>>> *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>>> *Subject: *RE: [EXTERNAL] [VOTE] Recommend a standard User-Agent >>>>>> format for REST clients [REOPEN] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. >>>>>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender >>>>>> and know the content is safe. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 15:23 rahul mahadev <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> [Reopning voting after going through reviews from @adutra] >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Following the discussion thread [1], I'd like to call a vote on >>>>>> standardizing the client User-Agent format in the REST catalog spec. >>>>>> >>>>>> What a +1 endorses: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Clients identify themselves with the standard HTTP User-Agent header >>>>>> (RFC 7231): whitespace-separated product/version tokens, most >>>>>> specific >>>>>> first (engine, then any integration or connector, then the Iceberg >>>>>> library, then the runtime), with an optional parenthesized comment >>>>>> for >>>>>> extra context. Example: >>>>>> >>>>>> Spark/4.0.0 iceberg-spark/1.9.0 iceberg-java/1.9.0 (scala 2.13.16) >>>>>> >>>>>> - When the header is sent, the Iceberg library token (iceberg-java, >>>>>> pyiceberg, iceberg-rust, iceberg-go) must be present. >>>>>> - The header is advisory. Servers must not reject a request just >>>>>> because >>>>>> it is missing or malformed, and must not use it for authentication. >>>>>> Servers may refuse operations from client versions known to be >>>>>> unsafe. >>>>>> It is not a capability negotiation mechanism. >>>>>> >>>>>> The spec change is in PR [2]. If the vote passes, the follow-ups are >>>>>> conforming the client libraries (java, python, rust, go) to emit this >>>>>> format. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [ ] +1 Adopt this User-Agent format in the REST spec >>>>>> [ ] 0 >>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not adopt (please explain) >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Rahul >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/d6hkx66o8qc1lolh11l1lmswxlq0bpj9 >>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/17727 >>>>>> >>>>>>
