What I was trying to say is that i'm sure there's plenty of value for spark, but in it's current state the value is little from a Polaris point of view as an open catalog service?
Of course we can follow-up on that but is the current spec still considered wip or when 1.0 will be released, we would have to keep supporting it even if we come up with something more comprehensive? On Wed, Jun 11, 2025, 00:22 Eric Maynard <eric.w.mayn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't think there's a lot of value where the specification of a table > format is left to the client > Considering that you currently can use non-Iceberg tables in Polaris with > the Spark client and it works end-to-end, I'd have a hard time agreeing > that there is no value. > > But I think this discussion is maybe best moved to another thread. The > incremental change to add a location may make sense for the existing > generic table implementation, even if later we reach a consensus to rip it > out and replace it with something more "comprehensive". > > --EM >
