On 2024/12/13 02:46:06 Hang Ruan wrote:
> Thanks, David & Peter.
>
> I would love to be the RM for jdbc-3.3.0. And the jdbc-3.3.0 should
support
> Flink 1.19 and 1.20.
> There are still 6 open issues in jdbc-3.3.0. I think we could prepare this
> version after these issues are finished.
>
> Best,
> Hang
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 8:06 PM David Radley <da...@uk.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 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 <hu...@gmail.com>
> > *Date: *Tuesday, 10 December 2024 at 07:11
> > *To: *dev@flink.apache.org <de...@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 <ru...@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 <da...@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 <de...@gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Monday, 2 December 2024 at 01:57
> > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org <de...@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 <da...@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
> >
> I'm also willing to help as well, is there anywhere we can track
remaining work and/or unassigned work for this ?
