Thank you! Those look like valuable changes. Yes, copying over the PRs once there's a build and CI setup in apache/pulsar-sql would be great. It's worth postponing until https://github.com/apache/pulsar-sql/issues/3 has been resolved.
-Lari On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 at 11:45, Jie crossover <crossover...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi lari, > > I still have some pending PRs, can I just copy them over? > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=sort%3Aupdated-desc+is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+author%3AcrossoverJie+sql > -- > Best Regards！ > crossoverJie > > > Zixuan Liu <node...@gmail.com> 于2024年10月18日周五 16:20写道： > > > Hi lari, > > > > I can drive the build system and CI setup, could you assign this task to > > me? > > > > Thanks, > > Zixuan > > > > Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org> 于2024年10月18日周五 13:51写道： > > > > > There has been some interest in continuing to use Pulsar SQL in the > > > future. To facilitate this, I have taken the following actions: > > > - Extracted the pulsar-sql files from branch-3.0 to a new repository: > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-sql > > > - This new repository allows interested volunteers to make contributions, > > > which has been a barrier until now. > > > - The README file in https://github.com/apache/pulsar-sql explains how > > > the pulsar-sql files were extracted with commit history to the new > > > repository. > > > > > > Please note: > > > - The new repository currently lacks a build system and CI setup. > > > - Setting up the build and CI will be the first task for volunteers > > > interested in maintaining this component. > > > > > > We welcome contributions from the community to help maintain and improve > > > Pulsar SQL going forward. In the meantime, current Pulsar SQL users can > > > continue to use Pulsar 3.0.x LTS, which is supported until May 2025. > > There > > > are more details in the GitHub Discussions answer, > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/discussions/23435 > > > > > > -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> > > > > > > > > >
