I'm in favor of adopting this fix in 1.16.0. +1
On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 7:13 AM tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > This looks reasonable. > > Best, > tison. > > > Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> 于2022年8月9日周二 21:33写道： > > > +1 for bumping the Kafka dependency. > > > > Flink X.Y.0 releases require thorough testing, so considering the > severity > > of the problem this is still good timing, even that close to the first > RC. > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > > > Thomas > > > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 7:51 AM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > The Kafka upgrade in 1.15.0 resulted in a regression > > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-28060) where offsets are > > > not committed to Kafka, impeding monitoring and the starting offsets > > > functionality of the connector. > > > > > > This has been fixed a about a week ago in Kafka 3.2.1. > > > > > > The question is whether we want to upgrade Kafka so close to the > feature > > > freeze. I'm usually not a friend of doing that in general, but in this > > > case there is a specific issue we'd like to get fixed and we still have > > > the entire duration of the feature freeze to observe the behavior. > > > > > > I'd like to know what you think about this. > > > > > > For reference, our current Kafka version is 3.1.1, and our CI is > passing > > > with 3.2.1. > > > > > > > > > > > >
