Hi devs,
I'm glad to announce that the must-have work items for release 2.0 [1] have
been approved. The voting thread is [2] and the discussions can be found in
[3][4].
There are 11 approving votes, 7 of which are binding:
- Xintong Song (binding)
- Yuan Mei (binding)
- Yu Li (binding)
- Leonard
Thanks all for participating. I'm closing this vote in another thread.
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 11:37 AM Jiabao Sun
wrote:
> + 1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks Xintong for driving this.
>
> Best,
> Jiabao
>
>
> On 2023/07/20 09:22:46 Xintong Song wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to
+ 1 (non-binding)
Thanks Xintong for driving this.
Best,
Jiabao
On 2023/07/20 09:22:46 Xintong Song wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items for
> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and the
> previous voting thread is [
, Jul 26, 2023 at 5:18 PM Yun Tang wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding), thanks @xintong for driving this work.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best
> > > > Yun Tang
> > > >
> > > > From: Z
____
> > > From: Zhu Zhu
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
> > >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
Hi,
I split the blockers [1] from the nice-to-haves [2] and added some missing
items.
>From [1], the one about support for the ExternallyInducedSource [3] is
debatable -
AFAIK, it is only used by Pravega, which is not an officially-supported
connector.
This can, arguably, be something we could hop
Hi
I agree with Konstantin that we should have a todo list to provide a clear
picture of when and how to deprecate the SinkFunction. Please let me check
if I can prepare a dedicated thread for it, since I got some feedback and
hints from previous discussions.
Best regards,
Jing
On Wed, Jul 26,
> > From: Zhu Zhu
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
> > To: dev@flink.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Zhu
> >
hu
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
> To: dev@flink.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Zhu
>
> Leonard Xu 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
> >
> > Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
&g
+1 (non-binding), thanks @xintong for driving this work.
Best
Yun Tang
From: Zhu Zhu
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
+1 (binding)
Thanks,
Zhu
Leonard Xu 于2023年7月26日
+1 (binding)
Thanks,
Zhu
Leonard Xu 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
>
> Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
>
> +1(binding)
>
> Best,
> Leonard
>
> > On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Xingtong,
> >
> > yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted
Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
+1(binding)
Best,
Leonard
> On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf
> wrote:
>
> Hi Xingtong,
>
> yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
> Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
>
> Thanks for the clari
Hi everyone,
I'd just like to add that we also said, that we would continue the
discussion to come up and agree on a list of concrete blockers for the
removal of SourceFunction, so that don't need to have the same discussion
again in half a year. And while we are add it, we should do the same thin
Hi Xingtong,
yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
Thanks for the clarification,
Konstantin
Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
tonysong...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Konstantin,
>
> It seems the
Hi Konstantin,
It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and part of
the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a *nice-to-have*
item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do you have
different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
If there are
Thanks Leonard for driving this, and thanks everyone for the discussion.
The back-and-force reflects the importance and complexity around this
topic. Glad to see we finally reached consensus.
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:42 AM Jing Ge wrote:
> Thanks Leonard for driving it. We ar
Thanks Leonard for driving it. We are now on the same page.
Best regards,
Jing
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 9:19 PM Leonard Xu wrote:
> We’ve detailed offline discussions with @Alexander and @Jingsong, about
> “Remove SourceFunction” item, we’ve reached a consensus as following:
>
> 1. Deprecate Sou
We’ve detailed offline discussions with @Alexander and @Jingsong, about “Remove
SourceFunction” item, we’ve reached a consensus as following:
1. Deprecate SourceFunction in 1.18 and implement following improvement
subtasks of FLINK-28045[1] later is reasonable for all of us.
2. Deleting SourceF
I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed from the
table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has concluded.
There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov and
Maximilian Michels, who
+1 (binding)
Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
Best Regards,
Yu
On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> resolving the complexities :-)
>
> Best
> Yuan
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong So
+1 (binding)
Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
resolving the complexities :-)
Best
Yuan
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items for
> release 2.0 [1]. The correspon
On 21/07/2023 11:45, Leonard Xu wrote:
In this way, the user will see the deprecated API firstly but they can not find
a candidate if we can not finish all tasks in one minor version .
i'm not convinced that this matters. There will be a whole bunch of APIs
deprecated in 1.18 (that will remai
> @Leonard
> If we follow the agreed-upon and voted path and do not revert [1], all the
> formalities get fulfilled
Hi Alexander
Sorry for making you uncomfortable even though it was discussed on the dev list
and under JIRA before reverting this PR.
I'm also +1 for the FLIP as your posted.
> How about this, we continue with the vote as is, and keep the discussion
on
the SourceFunction in Jira or a separate thread.
Sure, but I just want to mention two important things here before we switch
over to [1]:
>Given that eliminating the removal of SourceFunction was proposed 10 days
- This
Hi Alexander
> I see your concerns regarding the complexity of migration, but we still
> have one year to address them.
Not only the complexity of migration, but also we lack migration path for now.
We have to deprecate SourceFunction/SinkFunction in 1.18 which feature freeze
date is 2023/07/2
f the list of "Remove deprecated APIs" means, we must remove the
> code
> > >> in
> > >> > > Flink-2.0 initial release, I would vote -1 for queryable state
> > before
> > >> we
> > >> > > get an alternative.
> > &
> > Flink-2.0 initial release, I would vote -1 for queryable state
> before
> >> we
> >> > > get an alternative.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > FYI, the removal of queryable state is currently marked as the
> >> `must-have`
> >
ly why we
>> > are collecting feedback about the list now.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> >
>> > Xintong
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 3:15 PM Yun Tang wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi Xintong,
>> &g
Hi all,
I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items for
release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and the
previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous voting thread
have been addressed.
Please note that once the vote is approved, any ch
> I prefer to not removing the implementation until we have a better
> > > solution (maybe based on the queryable snapshot) cc @Yuan.
> > >
> > > If the list of "Remove deprecated APIs" means, we must remove the code
> in
> > > Flink-2.0 initial
e code in
> > Flink-2.0 initial release, I would vote -1 for queryable state before we
> > get an alternative.
> > And I will raise the concern in the Flink roadmap discussion.
> >
> >
> > Best
> > Yun Tang
> >
> &g
release, I would vote -1 for queryable state before we
> get an alternative.
> And I will raise the concern in the Flink roadmap discussion.
>
>
> Best
> Yun Tang
>
> From: Xintong Song
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 10:07
> To: dev@flink.ap
3 10:07
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items
@Yun,
I see your point that the ability queryable states trying to provide is
meaningful but the current implementation of the feature is problematic. So
what's your opinion on deprecating the current queryabl
rt Yuxia's opinion that we should
>> > explicitly let our users know how to migrate their existing DataSet API
>> > based applications afterwards, meaning that the guideline Xintong
>> mentioned
>> > is a must-have (rather than best efforts) before removing th
ps://syntaxbug.com/06a3e7c554/
>
> Best
> Yun Tang
> ________
> From: Xintong Song
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 13:51
> To: dev@flink.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items
>
> Thanks for the support, Yu.
>
> We w
m: Xintong Song
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 13:51
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items
Thanks for the support, Yu.
We will have the guideline before removing DataSet. We are currently
prioritizing works that need to be done before the 1.18 feature freeze
gt;
> > Best regards,
> > Yuxia
> >
> > ----- 原始邮件 -----
> > 发件人: "Xintong Song"
> > 收件人: "dev"
> > 发送时间: 星期三, 2023年 7 月 12日 上午 11:40:12
> > 主题: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items
> >
> > @Yuxia,
> >
&g
migrating from
> DataSet to DataStream will definitely be helpful.
>
> Best regards,
> Yuxia
>
> - 原始邮件 -
> 发件人: "Xintong Song"
> 收件人: "dev"
> 发送时间: 星期三, 2023年 7 月 12日 上午 11:40:12
> 主题: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items
>
> @
Thanks Xintong for clarification. A guideline to help users migrating from
DataSet to DataStream will definitely be helpful.
Best regards,
Yuxia
- 原始邮件 -
发件人: "Xintong Song"
收件人: "dev"
发送时间: 星期三, 2023年 7 月 12日 上午 11:40:12
主题: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have wor
atastream are missing many API. I think it may well take much
> effort to fully cover the missing api.
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/syjmt8f74gh8ok3z4lhgt95zl4dzn168
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Yuxia
> >
> > - 原始邮件 -
> > 发件人: &q
ia
>
> - 原始邮件 -
> 发件人: "Jing Ge"
> 收件人: "dev"
> 发送时间: 星期三, 2023年 7 月 12日 上午 1:23:40
> 主题: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items
>
> agree with what Leonard said. There are actually more issues wrt the new
> Source and SinkV2[1]
>
&g
much effort to fully
cover the missing api.
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/syjmt8f74gh8ok3z4lhgt95zl4dzn168
Best regards,
Yuxia
- 原始邮件 -
发件人: "Jing Ge"
收件人: "dev"
发送时间: 星期三, 2023年 7 月 12日 上午 1:23:40
主题: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items
agree with wha
agree with what Leonard said. There are actually more issues wrt the new
Source and SinkV2[1]
Speaking of must-have vs nice-to-have, I think it depends on the priority.
If removing them has higher priority, we should keep related tasks as
must-have and make sure enough effort will be put to solve
Hi Galen,
We were aware of the issue and are working on it. StreamingFileSink is a
SinkFunction that could not be removed yes as mentioned previously. You can
find SinkV1 at [1]
Best regards,
Jing
[1]
https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/4cf2124d71a8dd0595e40f07c2dbcc4c85883b82/flink-core/src/m
Regarding SinkV1 vs. SinkV2: Is StreamingFileSink a SinkV1-related
interface that is proposed to be removed? In a separate thread, it was
discussed how it's important not to remove StreamingFileSink as long as
this critical issue with SinkV2 is still outstanding --
https://issues.apache.org/jira/pl
Hi, Xintong
> Could you please clarify what exact changes you are proposing to make on
> the existing list?
> - Are you suggesting removing the item "Remove deprecated APIs -
> SourceFunction / SinkFunction / SinkV1", or are you suggesting downgrading
> it as nice-to-have?
I prefer to remove the
Thanks for the inputs, Yuan and Leonard.
I'm canceling this vote, w.r.t. the objections and proposed changes.
Meantime, please feel free to raise other concerns and proposed changes in
this thread, before we call for another vote.
@Leonard,
Could you please clarify what exact changes you are prop
Thanks Xintong for driving this great work! But I’ve to give my -1(binding)
here：
-1 to mark "deprecat SourceFunction/SinkFunction/Sinkv1" item as must to have
for release 2.0.
I do a lot of connector work in the community, and I have two insights from
past experience:
1. Many developers repo
As a second thought, I think "Eager State Declaration" is probably not a
must-have.
I was originally thinking it is a prerequisite for "state querying for
disaggregated state management".
Since disaggregated state management itself is not a must-have, "Eager
State Declaration" is not as well. We
+1
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 12:52 PM Yu Li wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks for driving this and great to see us moving forward.
>
> Best Regards,
> Yu
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2023 at 11:59, Feng Wang wrote:
>
> > +1
> > Thanks for driving this, looking forward to the next stage of flink.
> >
> > O
+1 (binding)
Thanks for driving this and great to see us moving forward.
Best Regards,
Yu
On Mon, 10 Jul 2023 at 11:59, Feng Wang wrote:
> +1
> Thanks for driving this, looking forward to the next stage of flink.
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 5:31 PM Xintong Song wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'
+1
Thanks for driving this, looking forward to the next stage of flink.
On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 5:31 PM Xintong Song wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start the VOTE for the must-have work items for release 2.0
> [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2].
>
> Please note that once the vote i
+1
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 10:46 AM Yuan Mei wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks for driving this!
>
> Best
> Yuan
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 10:26 AM Jark Wu wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks for driving this. Looking forward to starting the 2.0 works.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jark
> >
> > On
+1 (binding)
Thanks for driving this!
Best
Yuan
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 10:26 AM Jark Wu wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks for driving this. Looking forward to starting the 2.0 works.
>
> Best,
> Jark
>
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 at 17:31, Xintong Song wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to start
+1 (binding)
Thanks for driving this. Looking forward to starting the 2.0 works.
Best,
Jark
On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 at 17:31, Xintong Song wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start the VOTE for the must-have work items for release 2.0
> [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2].
>
> Please note
Hi all,
I'd like to start the VOTE for the must-have work items for release 2.0
[1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2].
Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the must-have
items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority) requires
another vote. Assigni
56 matches
Mail list logo
