Hi Hang, Thankyou very much - just to confirm, are you willing to be the release manager for the JDBC connector Flink 1.20 compatible release? If so, when are you thinking of kicking this off.
Kind regards, David. From: Peter Huang <huangzhenqiu0...@gmail.com> Date: Tuesday, 10 December 2024 at 07:11 To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Plans for JDBC connector for 1.20? Hi Yanquan and Ruan, Echo to David's request. To support lineage integration in JDBC connector, we need to drop the support of Flink 1.18 for back compatibility check as the recent change in Kafka Connector https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-35109. Best Regards Peter Huang On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 7:27 PM Hang Ruan <ruanhang1...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, Yanquan & David. > > I would like to help to release the version jdbc-3.3.0. > Thanks~ > > Best, > Hang > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 10:42 PM David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Yanquan, > > Thanks for your support. Yes and support for the new dialects. > > > > It would be great to get open PRs merged to support new dialect if > > possible, including: > > https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-jdbc/pull/118 - this has been > > around for a while with the submitter asking for a merge – the CI tests > are > > currently failing – but if you can reassure him you could merge after a > > rebase that would be fabulous. > > > > and > > https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-jdbc/pull/149 > > open lineage support would be great so we have more complete support at > > Flink 1.20 and 2. > > > > The next step is to agree a committer to be the release manager; are you > > interested in doing this? > > Kind regards, David. > > > > > > From: Yanquan Lv <decq12y...@gmail.com> > > Date: Monday, 2 December 2024 at 01:57 > > To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Plans for JDBC connector for 1.20? > > Hi, David. > > > > +1 to cut main into a new 1.20 compatible release as flink-connector-jdbc > > for 1.20 is a demand frequently mentioned by users and is also > prioritized > > for adaptation to Flink 2.0. > > > > I’ve checked the issues[1] that were solved in 3.3, most of them are > > introduced by FLIP-377: Support fine-grained configuration to control > > filter push down for Table/SQL Sources and FLIP-449: Reorganization of > > flink-connector-jdbc, and only two bugfixs[4] that related jdbc-3.2.0 > > product codes, which I don't think is a blocking that must create a > release. > > > > [1] > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33460?jql=project%20%3D%20FLINK%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20jdbc-3.3.0 > > [2] > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=276105768 > > [3] > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-449%3A+Reorganization+of+flink-connector-jdbc > > [4] > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-35542?jql=project%20%3D%20FLINK%20AND%20issuetype%20%3D%20Bug%20AND%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20jdbc-3.3.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2024年11月22日 01:15，David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> 写道： > > > > > > Hi, > > > Is there a plan to release the JDBC for Flink 1.20? Apologies if this > is > > already in hand, I could not find anything: > > > > > > * I notice that the last JDBC connector content corresponding to > > Flink 1.19 contained minimal content. > > > * The main branch – now has a pom with 1.20 and contains a massive > > amount of content compared to 1.19, which has minimal cherry picked fixes > > in. > > > * So the worry is that we have a large amount of unshipped code in > > main, amplified by the fact that there is introduces support for many new > > databases. > > > * The latest code appears to have open lineage support with > > https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-jdbc/pull/137 so I assume the > > main code is now not compatible with Flink 1.19 > > > > > > > > > Thinking about how to move this forward. Some options: > > > > > > 1. I am wondering is there an appetite to cut main into a new 1.20 > > compatible release pretty much as-is > > > 2. We could do a 1.19 and 1.20 compatible release like the Kafka > > connector 3.3 and a 1.20 open lineage release like the Kafka connector > 3.4, > > with minimal critical backported fixes. > > > > > > I am keen to do option 1), as the main code will otherwise continue to > > diverse from what we release. I wonder what manual per database testing > > would be required; to reassure us all the new database support actually > > works. Or is the existing automated testing enough? > > > > > > If we get some consensus on approach, I can help drive this, as this is > > going to be an inhibitor for many of us in the community to migrate to > > Flink 1.20 and subsequently to Flink v2. > > > > > > Kind regards, David. > > > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN > > > Unless otherwise stated above: IBM United Kingdom Limited Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN
