Hi guys, Sorry for jumping in, but I think
[FLINK-8101] Elasticsearch 6.X support [FLINK-7386] Flink Elasticsearch 5 connector is not compatible with Elasticsearch 5.2+ client have long been awaited and there was one PR from me and from someone else showing the interest ;) So if you could consider it for 1.5 that would be great! Thanks! -- Christophe On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Aljoscha, > > it would be great if we can include the first version of the SQL client > (see FLIP-24, Implementation Plan 1). I will open a PR this week. I think > we can merge this with explicit "experimental/alpha" status. It is far away > from feature completeness but will be a great tool for Flink beginners. > > In order to use the SQL client we would need to also add some table > sources with the new unified table factories (FLINK-8535), but this is > optional because a user can implement own table factories at the begining. > > Regards, > Timo > > > Am 2/5/18 um 2:36 PM schrieb Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai: > > Hi Aljoscha, >> >> Thanks for starting the discussion. >> >> I think there’s a few connector related must-have improvements that we >> should get in before the feature freeze, since quite a few users have been >> asking for them: >> >> [FLINK-6352] FlinkKafkaConsumer should support to use timestamp to set up >> start offset >> [FLINK-5479] Per-partition watermarks in FlinkKafkaConsumer should >> consider idle partitions >> [FLINK-8516] Pluggable shard-to-subtask partitioning for >> FlinkKinesisConsumer >> [FLINK-6109] Add a “checkpointed offset” metric to FlinkKafkaConsumer >> >> These are still missing in the master branch. Only FLINK-5479 is still >> lacking a pull request. >> >> Cheers, >> Gordon >> >> On 31 January 2018 at 10:38:43 AM, Aljoscha Krettek (aljos...@apache.org) >> wrote: >> Hi Everyone, >> >> When we decided to do the 1.4.0 release a while back we did that to get a >> stable release out before putting in a couple of new features. Back then, >> some of those new features (FLIP-6, network stack changes, local state >> recovery) were almost ready and we wanted to do a shortened 1.5.0 >> development cycle to allow for those features to become ready and then do >> the next release. >> >> We are now approaching the approximate time where we wanted to do the >> Flink 1.5.0 release so I would like to gauge where we are and gather >> opinions on how we should proceed now. >> >> With this, I'd also like to propose myself as the release manager for >> 1.5.0 but I'm very happy to yield if someone else would be interested in >> doing that. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Best, >> Aljoscha >> > > > -- Christophe
