[DRAFT][Iceberg 1.11] View registration

[adutra]

Requires #3687

Checklist

• 🛡️ Don't disclose security issues! (contact security@apache.org)
• 🔗 Clearly explained why the changes are needed, or linked related issues: Fixes #
• 🧪 Added/updated tests with good coverage, or manually tested (and explained how)
• 💡 Added comments for complex logic
• 🧾 Updated CHANGELOG.md (if needed)
• 📚 Updated documentation in site/content/in-dev/unreleased (if needed)

[snazy]

Wonder whether we should focus on the necessary changes in the feature branch.
Register-view is a new functionality, wonder whether we should do this change directly against main once the feature branch is merged. WDYT?

[adutra]

Wonder whether we should focus on the necessary changes in the feature branch. Register-view is a new functionality, wonder whether we should do this change directly against main once the feature branch is merged. WDYT?

I think it would be nicer, if possible, to start working ahead of phase.

Register view is just one of the items we need to work on. There is also "register table with overwrite", cf. #3682. And then, of course, there is remote signing, if the spec changes get merged before 1.11 is cut.

But I get the problem with merging new features into the feature/iceberg-1.11 branch: the individual commits would end up squashed when merged to main, which is not great.

Wdyt about enabling "Rebase & Merge" so that we could keep working on the feature branch, then rebase the final result onto main, keeping each new feature in a separate commit?

[adutra]

The other option is to keep working against the feature branch, but refraining from merging new features into it, and wait instead until main is ready.

[snazy]

I think we can keep those things as separate commits (rebase/squash as needed) on the feature branch and then "peal out" individual PRs from the feature branch. That makes reviewing the "final PRs" easier.