This approach means that we will have API breaking changes lingering around in random people's remote repos that will be untrackable in no time and people will not be able to build on each others changes. Whoever will have the pleasure to eventually merge those together will be on the receiving end of some great fun. I see two alternatives: Either fork a "traditional" release-2.0 already, which I do agree would be an overkill to maintain with all the commits flowing in for a year or so. Or at least we could dedicate a branch to centrally collect the api breaking changes since the release-1.0 api.
I appreciate the api extending methodology and would certainly love to follow it myself, but the concrete issue basically is that the return type of a function in the public api is not right. We can methods with the correct return type, but that is borderline more ugly than the current solution. On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > I think its too early to fork off a 2.0 branch. I have absolutely no idea > when a 2.0 release becomes relevant, could be easily a year from now. > > The API stability guarantees don't forbid adding new methods. Maybe we can > find a good way to resolve the issue without changing the signature of > existing methods. > And for tracking API breaking changes, maybe it makes sense to create a > 2.0.0 version in JIRA and set the "fix-for" for the issue to 2.0. > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Márton Balassi <balassi.mar...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > Ok, if that is what we promised let's stick to that. > > Then would you suggest to open a release-2.0 branch and merge it there? > > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hey, > > > JIRA was down for quite a while yesterday. Sadly, I don't think we can > > > merge the change because its API breaking. > > > One of the promises of the 1.0 release is that we are not breaking any > > APIs > > > in the 1.x.y series of Flink. We can fix those issues with a 2.x > release. > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:27 AM, Márton Balassi < > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The JIRA issue is FLINK-3610. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Márton Balassi < > > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have just come across a shortcoming of the streaming Scala API: > it > > > > > completely lacks the Scala implementation of the DataStreamSink and > > > > > instead the Java version is used. [1] > > > > > > > > > > I would regard this as a bug that needs a fix for 1.0.1. > > Unfortunately > > > > > this is also api-breaking. > > > > > > > > > > Will post it to JIRA shortly - but issues.apache.org is > unresponsive > > > for > > > > > me currently. Wanted to raise the issue here as it might affect the > > > api. > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/flink-streaming-scala > > > > > > /src/main/scala/org/apache/flink/streaming/api/scala/DataStream.scala > > > > > #L928-L929 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
