sungwy closed issue #739: Tracking issues of iceberg rust v0.4.0 Release
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2557056690
Yes, I'm on it 🖖
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comme
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2556430181
Hi, @sungwy, https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/826 has been fixed.
Would you like to start a new rc instead?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Ser
sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2546410059
Let's get this party started~! 🎈
Here's the PR to remove deprecated functions, and bump the version of
iceberg-rust for review: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/8
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2546101308
> Could someone help review this PR so we can get the versions synced to
0.4.0? #808
Merged. Let's move!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To re
sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2546075233
Sounds good folks. I'll get started with the release.
Based on the discussion above, I think we are good to start the release,
with the new Python binding included in the sam
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2546015586
> Both look good to me. According to [#795
(comment)](https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/795#discussion_r1884873126),
this reorder will not happen if we use in avro format
ZENOTME commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2546006235
Both look good to me. According to
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/795#discussion_r1884873126, this
reorder will not happen if we use in avro format. In this release v
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2545990295
Hi, I personally believe https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/795 is
not a blocker. Let's proceed with the release and avoid adding more PRs unless
we have truly critical is
ZENOTME commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2545295896
Should we merge #795 before release?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go t
liurenjie1024 commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2545188196
Should we cut a branch for 0.4.0-rc1?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2545155433
Hi, @sungwy, I prefer to split them into different tarballs since they have
different versions. However, I don't have a strong opinion on this. I believe
it would be great to relea
Fokko commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2545140388
I've cleaned up the milestone, and I think we're good to go 🚀
@sungwy Since we release everything simultaneously, I would highly recommend
putting everything in a single tarb
sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2543350809
It looks like two issues have been resolved, and
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/771 is very close to being merged.
We'll get started with the release shortly! 🚀
sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2536048804
Also update on https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/706 : I've
investigated it and it looks like a non-issue. I'm waiting on the issue
reporters to respond before closing
sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2530036083
Thank you for working on the issue @c-thiel and keeping this thread updated!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2528762083
> @Xuanwo, @sungwy #694 is either fixed by leaving things as-is or by
merging https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/771 - see my comment at the
top of the PR.
Thank yo
c-thiel commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2528628490
@Xuanwo, @sungwy #694 is either fixed by leaving things as-is or by merging
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/771 - see my comment at the top of
the PR.
--
This is an
c-thiel commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2527134335
> > @sungwy I think we should add #694 to the blockers as well. If we decide
to not introduce a `SchemalessPartitionSpec`, we shouldn't release it as part
of 0.4.0 as it would be
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2522462528
> @sungwy I think we should add #694 to the blockers as well. If we decide
to not introduce a `SchemalessPartitionSpec`, we shouldn't release it as part
of 0.4.0 as it would be a s
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2522460352
It's better to include https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/665 in.
I'm working on this now.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the
sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2517238023
@c-thiel Hi Christian, thanks for flagging the issue! I've been tracking the
discussion, and it looks like we are getting closer to a consensus on how we'd
like to resolve the issu
c-thiel commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2508913423
@sungwy I think we should add
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/694 to the blockers as well.
If we decide to not introduce a `SchemalessPartitionSpec`, we shouldn't
Xuanwo commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2507782914
I believe we need something like
https://github.com/apache/opendal/blob/main/scripts/release.py to help generate
ASF source tarballs for core and python binding.
--
This is an a
sungwy opened a new issue, #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739
This issue is used to track tasks of the iceberg rust 0.4.0 release.
## Tasks
### Blockers
> Blockers are the tasks that must be completed before the release.
- [ ] https://gith
25 matches
Mail list logo
