Hi, Thank you for casting your votes. I have forgotten to set the voting period, but let's implicitly assume it was 3 days from the creation of the voting thread.
FLIP-203 [1] Has been accepted. There were 4 binding votes and 2 non-binding in favor. None against. Best, Piotrek [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-203%3A+Incremental+savepoints śr., 26 sty 2022 o 18:27 Anton Kalashnikov <kaa....@yandex.com> napisał(a): > +1 (non-binding) > > Thanks Piotr. > -- > Best regards, > Anton Kalashnikov > > 26.01.2022 11:21, David Anderson пишет: > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > I'm pleased to see this significant improvement coming along, as well as > > the effort made in the FLIP to document what is and isn't supported (and > > where ??? remain). > > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:58 AM Yu Li<car...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> +1 (binding) > >> > >> Thanks for driving this Piotr! Just one more (belated) suggestion: in > the > >> "Checkpoint vs savepoint guarantees" section, there are still question > >> marks scattered in the table, and I suggest putting all TODO works into > the > >> "Limitations" section, or adding a "Future Work" section, for easier > later > >> tracking. > >> > >> Best Regards, > >> Yu > >> > >> > >> On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 at 18:48, Konstantin Knauf<kna...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks, Piotr. Proposal looks good. > >>> > >>> +1 (binding) > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 11:20 AM David Morávek<d...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> +1 (non-binding) > >>>> > >>>> Best, > >>>> D. > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:54 AM Dawid Wysakowicz < > >>> dwysakow...@apache.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> +1 (binding) > >>>>> > >>>>> Best, > >>>>> > >>>>> Dawid > >>>>> > >>>>> On 24/01/2022 09:56, Piotr Nowojski wrote: > >>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As there seems to be no further questions about the FLIP-203 [1] I > >>>> would > >>>>>> propose to start a voting thread for it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For me there are still two unanswered questions, whether we want to > >>>>> support > >>>>>> schema evolution and State Processor API with native format > >> snapshots > >>>> or > >>>>>> not. But I would propose to tackle them as follow ups, since those > >>> are > >>>>>> pre-existing issues of the native format checkpoints, and could be > >>> done > >>>>>> completely independently of providing the native format support in > >>>>>> savepoints. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best, > >>>>>> Piotrek > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [1] > >>>>>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-203%3A+Incremental+savepoints > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Konstantin Knauf > >>> > >>> https://twitter.com/snntrable > >>> > >>> https://github.com/knaufk > >>>
