Hi Pierre, Thanks for mentioning the removal of the beta label for Generic Table! I’ve put together PR [3096], and it would be awesome if we could get it into the 1.3.0 release.
[3096]: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3096 Best Regards, Yun On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:27 AM Robert Stupp <[email protected]> wrote: > > Do we want to include KMS support [1424] into 1.3.0? > > That would be great! > Just not so much time left until the release is cut (following the > release train model). > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 4:30 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > Do we want to include KMS support [1424] into 1.3.0? > > > > I do not have a strong opinion, mentioning this only because the PR seems > > to be pretty close to completion. > > > > [1424] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1424 > > > > Cheers, > > Dmitri. > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 5:23 AM Pierre Laporte <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello folks > > > > > > I noticed that the changelog currently does not contain any entry for > the > > > following: > > > > > > 1. OPA integration > > > 2. Apache Ozone integration > > > 3. --no-sts CLI enhancement > > > 4. Multiple catalog federation commits (SigV4 and credential vending) > > > > > > I am going to open a PR to update the changelog with those. Please > let me > > > know if I missed anything. > > > > > > Also, there is currently a dev ML thread about removing the beta label > for > > > Generic Tables for 1.3.0 [1]. I believe that although this only > affects > > > the documentation, we need the change to the site/ directory to be > included > > > in the release tag. So this means that we want to wait for this to be > done > > > before releasing 1.3.0. Would it be possible to get confirmation for > this? > > > > > > 1: https://lists.apache.org/thread/4rtbn6jlxyw92z3jvzx847pfj92vcf0f > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Pierre > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 8:15 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying the ATR context, that helps a lot. It’s great > to > > > hear > > > > that Polaris’ semi-automated release process could complement ATR’s > > > > efforts. I agree it’d be valuable for us to collaborate and share > > > learnings > > > > as both projects evolve. > > > > > > > > On the generic table topic, let’s start a focused thread to discuss. > Here > > > > is a slack thread about Delta table use cases, > > > > > https://apache-polaris.slack.com/archives/C084QSKD6S2/p1762203273837449. > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 6:25 AM Robert Stupp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > Just to clarify: ATR is currently available for internal ASF > feedback > > > > > only. The project is in alpha development and subject to > significant > > > > > changes. > > > > > There is a test instance to "play" with the ATR release process. > > > > > I think the Polaris project should really help the ATR project and > I'm > > > > > sure that Polaris' (semi) automated release process would work fine > > > > > with ATR. > > > > > > > > > > Generic tables have documented limitations [1], so I think we > should > > > > > have a discussion about how the feature can be evolved. > > > > > It would be interesting to know what users think about it, but I > > > > > couldn't find any user feedback on generic tables on the mailing > list > > > > > or in GH issues. > > > > > > > > > > The JDBC schema compatibility is already handled in the code > itself, > > > > > at least that's my understanding. > > > > > > > > > > Last but not least, thanks Pierre for being the release manager for > > > > 1.3.0! > > > > > > > > > > Robert > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/blob/f056e22f7f3a7c53e233bef1b88d204d6a8e4d79/site/content/in-dev/unreleased/generic-table.md?plain=1#L162-L169 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 10:18 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Pierre for volunteering! +1 to giving the ATR tool a try. > It’d > > > > be > > > > > > great to see how far we can automate the process. BTW, could > anyone > > > > share > > > > > > information about the Apache ATR tool? I remember we used to > work on > > > a > > > > > tool > > > > > > dedicated to Polaris. I assume Apache ATR is a different tool. > > > > > > > > > > > > One thing to watch for in 1.3 is whether we want to remove the > beta > > > > label > > > > > > for Generic Table. The feature has been stable for a while and is > > > used > > > > in > > > > > > multiple integrations. We've postponed it for 2 releases(1.1 and > > > 1.2). > > > > > That > > > > > > of course deserves a separate discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's also worth monitoring Postgres DB schema changes between > 1.2 and > > > > > 1.3, > > > > > > since even small updates could break upgrades. We need to handle > > > those > > > > > > carefully. > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise, it looks good to start planning the branch cut and RC > > > > timing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 9:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for volunteering, Pierre! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the ATR tool, I think it would be great to give it a try > > > with > > > > > > > Polaris 1.3.0. If it becomes too much of an overhead we can > always > > > go > > > > > back > > > > > > > to our usual release process. I think we're not required to > release > > > > > via ATR > > > > > > > if/when we start a trial :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 3:50 AM Pierre Laporte < > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to volunteer for that so that I can run the > > > workflows > > > > > and > > > > > > > > verify everything is in order for an automated release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not certain how this will play with the ATR tool. It > might > > > be > > > > > too > > > > > > > > early to sign up for that. Wdyt? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pierre > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 5:33 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it's time to start thinking/prep 1.3.0-incubating > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who would volunteer to be release manager ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it would be great to join the Apache ATR tool. I > would > > > be > > > > > > > > > happy to help the release manager in this regard. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
