+1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and also part of other releases, the release overhead should be manageable.
@Vino: I agree with your assessment. @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6. Best, Ufuk On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <luoqi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Till, > > Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be supported? > Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink major versions in > production. If Flink terminates support for a major version too quickly, it > may be a concern for companies. > > Best, > Qi > > > On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <yanghua1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Till, > > > > I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially some > > serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5. > > Consider that some companies' production environments are more cautious > > about upgrading large versions. > > I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x. > > > > Best, > > Vino > > > > Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道： > > > >> Dear community, > >> > >> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should release a last > >> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch. > >> > >> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to support the > >> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the current > >> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes address > >> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing > >> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the > >> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for our users > >> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last 1.5.6 > >> release. What do you think? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Till > >> >
