Skip to content

REST: Use the standard User-Agent format - #4330

Merged
Fokko merged 3 commits into
apache:mainfrom
rahulsmahadev:user-agent-format
Nov 11, 2026
Merged

Fokko merged 3 commits into
apache:mainfrom
rahulsmahadev:user-agent-format

Conversation

@rahulsmahadev

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Rationale for this change

The Iceberg REST catalog spec now recommends a standard User-Agent format (apache/iceberg#17727). pyiceberg now sends pyiceberg/<version> (<python implementation> <python version>), for example pyiceberg/0.11.0 (cpython 3.11.4), instead of PyIceberg/<version>. The X-Client-Version header is unchanged.

Are these changes tested?

Yes. The expected headers in tests/catalog/test_rest.py are updated, and test_user_agent_header checks the format for CPython and PyPy.

Are there any user-facing changes?

The User-Agent header sent to REST catalogs changes from PyIceberg/<version> to the format above.

This pull request and its description were written by Isaac.

Send pyiceberg/<version> (<python implementation> <python version>), for
example pyiceberg/0.11.0 (cpython 3.11.4), the format recommended by the
REST catalog spec (apache/iceberg#17727).

Co-authored-by: Isaac <no-reply@databricks.com>

@rambleraptor rambleraptor left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Love this! Thanks for driving this forward

@Fokko
Fokko enabled auto-merge November 11, 2026 14:32
Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

@kevinjqliu kevinjqliu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

I pushed a change to use for loop instead of parameterized in tests (9a3452b)

@Fokko
Fokko added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 11, 2026
Merged via the queue into apache:main with commit 3cca3d5 Nov 11, 2026
20 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants