Savonitar commented on code in PR #28586:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/28586#discussion_r3501297302
##########
flink-core/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/api/connector/source/SourceReaderContext.java:
##########
@@ -28,6 +30,16 @@
@Public
public interface SourceReaderContext {
+ /**
+ * Get the meta information of the current job.
+ *
+ * @return the job meta information.
+ */
+ @PublicEvolving
Review Comment:
Thanks @1996fanrui!
Before pushing a commit switching both `getJobInfo()` methods to
`@Experimental`. I have a few questions:
1. I'd originally used `@PublicEvolving` for consistency reasons:
a) **Parity with the sink side**: AFAIK SinkV2 InitContext.getJobInfo() was
@PublicEvolving since introduction, without `@Experimental` at any date. So,
`SinkV2`'s `InitContext.getJobInfo()` is `@PublicEvolving`, and that parity is
one of motivation points of the FLIP.
b) The return type `JobInfo` is itself `@PublicEvolving`, so an
`@Experimental` accessor returning a `@PublicEvolving` type is mildly
inconsistent, the method ends up "less stable" than what it returns. Meanwhile,
the method has a stable behavior.
2. I know that you participated in the FLIP discussion/voting but I want to
ask, FLIP-583 specifies `@PublicEvolving` for these methods. If we go with
`@Experimental`, should I update the FLIP so the doc and the code stay in sync?
I'm happy to change to `@Experimental` if you recommend, just wanted to flag
the parity/FLIP angle. Let me know which you'd like.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
