+1

Regards,
Penghui

On Mon, Dec 25, 2023 at 10:06 AM guo jiwei <techno...@apache.org> wrote:

> yes, +1 agree
>
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2023 at 11:37 AM Matteo Merli <matteo.me...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Good point. I have created a PR here:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21795
> >
> > We can always cherry-pick changes into the release branch, during the
> code
> > freeze, with the appropriate precautions :)
> >
> > Matteo
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > <matteo.me...@gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 9:41 AM Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Do we target release 3.2.0 if this change gets accepted?
> > >
> > > The code freeze for 3.2.0 was about to start today and I blocked that.
> I
> > > removed the already started branch-3.2 (which didn't contain any
> changes)
> > > until the decision has been made. I hope this makes sense. If not, we
> can
> > > always cut the branch again, nothing has been lost.
> > >
> > > re: https://lists.apache.org/thread/0pl9by5c53nkjp7vld3x89c8nqjrx9on
> > >
> > > -Lari
> > >
> > > On 2023/12/22 17:09:19 Matteo Merli wrote:
> > > > I want to start a discussion regarding the removal of all the code
> > > related
> > > > to the Trino (PrestoDB) plugin from the Pulsar main repository.
> > > >
> > > > This topic was already discussed and approved long time ago in
> PIP-62 (
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/PIP-62%3A-Move-connectors%2C-adapters-and-Pulsar-Presto-to-separate-repositories
> > > > )
> > > >
> > > > The main reasons for not having Presto plugin as part of the main
> > > > distribution of Pulsar were (and still are valid):
> > > >
> > > >  1. We need to ship the entire Presto runtime which is ~400 MB. This
> > > makes
> > > > our tgz and Docker images huge
> > > >  3. There is no strict need for this component to be in the same
> > > > distribution / image: it could easily be provided in a different
> > release
> > > > tgz or Docker image
> > > >
> > > > Though I think that since then it became more clear that the current
> > > state
> > > > of this plugin has been stagnating over the years.
> > > >
> > > > 1. There are not many active users of Pulsar-SQL component (I'd be
> very
> > > > happy to be contradicted here)
> > > > 2. The plugin code has not been improved in a long time
> > > > 3. There are several open security issues (actually, almost the
> > totality
> > > of
> > > > current dependencies issues are today coming from Trino).
> > > >
> > > > My suggestion would be that, if there is any volunteer willing to
> pick
> > > this
> > > > plugin up and maintain it in a separate repository (within the Apache
> > > > Pulsar project) and with a separate release schedule, we should go
> > ahead
> > > > and move it.
> > > > If there are no volunteers, we should just remove it as it is. If
> later
> > > on
> > > > we want to revive it, we can always import the code from the last
> > commit.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matteo Merli
> > > > <mme...@apache.org>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to