Hi Zakelly, I agree with Chesnay's response. I would suggest that during the process of moving CheckpointingMode from the flink-streaming-java module to the flink-core module, we should keep the package name unchanged. This approach would be completely transparent to users. In fact, this practice should be applicable to many of our desired moves from flink-streaming-java to higher-level modules, such as flink-runtime and flink-core.
Best, Junrui Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> 于2024年2月28日周三 05:18写道： > Moving classes (== keep the same package) to a module higher up in the > dependency tree should not be a breaking change and can imo be done > anytime without any risk to users. > > On 27/02/2024 17:01, Lincoln Lee wrote: > > Hi Zakelly, > > > > Thanks for letting us 1.19 RMs know about this! > > > > This change has been discussed during today's release sync meeting, we > > suggest not merge it into 1.19. > > We can continue discussing the removal in 2.x separately. > > > > Best, > > Lincoln Lee > > > > > > Hangxiang Yu <master...@gmail.com> 于2024年2月27日周二 11:28写道： > > > >> Hi, Zakelly. > >> Thanks for driving this. > >> Moving this class to flink-core makes sense to me which could make the > code > >> path and configs clearer. > >> It's marked as @Public from 1.0 and 1.20 should be the next long-term > >> version, so 1.19 should have been a suitable version to do it. > >> And also look forward to thoughts of other developers/RMs since 1.19 is > >> currently under a feature freeze status. > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 6:42 PM Zakelly Lan <zakelly....@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi devs, > >>> > >>> When working on the FLIP-406[1], I realized that moving all options of > >>> ExecutionCheckpointingOptions(flink-streaming-java) to > >>> CheckpointingOptions(flink-core) depends on relocating the > >>> enum CheckpointingMode(flink-streaming-java) to flink-core module. > >> However, > >>> the CheckpointingMode is annotated as @Public and used by datastream > api > >>> like 'CheckpointConfig#setCheckpointingMode'. So I'd like to start a > >>> discussion on moving the CheckpointingMode to flink-core. It is in a > >> little > >>> bit of a hurry if we want the old enum to be entirely removed in Flink > >> 2.x > >>> series, since the deprecation should be shipped in the upcoming Flink > >> 1.19. > >>> I suggest not creating a dedicated FLIP and treating this as a sub-task > >> of > >>> FLIP-406. > >>> > >>> I prepared a minimal change of providing new APIs and deprecating the > old > >>> ones[2], which could be merged to 1.19 if we agree to do so. > >>> > >>> Looking forward to your thoughts! Also cc RMs of 1.19 about this. > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=284789560 > >>> [2] > >>> > >>> > >> > https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/9bdd237d0322df8853f1b9e6ae658f77b9175237 > >>> Best, > >>> Zakelly > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Best, > >> Hangxiang. > >> > >
