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 item as we cannot deprecate SourceFunction / SinkFunction related interfaces in 1.18, thus he 2.0 version would not satisfy two minor versions condition and would not remove them as well. > - You said SinkV2 cannot cover SinkFunction. Then how about SinkV1? Is it > covered by SinkV2? Should it be removed or preserved? SinkV2 related interfaces covers SinkV1 related interfaces well, and SinkV1 related interfaces have been deprecated, I think they can be removed in 2.0 safely. In a word, my proposal is replace must have item "Remove deprecated APIs - SourceFunction / SinkFunction / SinkV1" with must have item "Remove deprecated APIs SinkV1" . Best, Leonard > > Best, > > Xintong > > > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 4:26 PM Leonard Xu <xbjt...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 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 reported that it is very difficult to migrate from >> SourceFunction to new Source [1]. The migration of existing conenctors >> after deprecated SourceFunction is very difficult. Some developers (Flavio >> Pompermaier) reported that they gave up the migration because it was too >> complicated. I believe it's not a few cases. This means that deprecating >> SourceFunction related interfaces require community contributors to reduce >> the migration cost before starting the migration work. >> >> 2. IIRC, the function of SinkV2 cannot currently cover SinkFunction as >> described in FLIP-287[2], it means the migration path after deprecate >> SinkFunction/Sinkv1 does not exist, thus we cannot mark the related >> interfaces of sinkfunction/sinkv1 as deprecated in 1.18. >> >> Based on these two cognitions, I think we should not mark these interfaces >> as must to have in 2.0. Maintaining the two sets of source/sink interfaces >> is not a concern for me, users can choose the interface to implement >> according to their energy and needs. >> >> Btw, some work items in 2.0 are marked as must to have, but no contributor >> has claimed them yet. I think this is a risk and hope the Release Managers >> could pay attention to it. >> >> Thank you all RMs for your work, sorry again for interrupting the vote >> >> Best, >> Leonard >> >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/sqq26s9rorynr4vx4nhxz3fmmxpgtdqp >> [2] >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=240880853 >> >>> On Jul 11, 2023, at 4:11 PM, Yuan Mei <yuanmei.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> 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 can downgrade it to "nice to have" >> if >>> no objection. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Yuan >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 7:02 PM Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.invalid> >> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 12:52 PM Yu Li <car...@gmail.com> 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 <wangfeng...@gmail.com> 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 <tonysong...@gmail.com> >>>>> 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 is approved, any changes to the >>>>> must-have >>>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority) >>>>> requires >>>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating >>>>> descriptions / >>>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another vote. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 12, following the consensus >>>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Xintong >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4 >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >>
