Hi，Xintong. Sorry to disturb the voting. I just found an email[1] about DataSet API from flink-user-zh channel. And I think it's not just a single case according to my observation.
Remove DataSet is a must have item in release-2.0. But as the user email said, if we remove DataSet, how users can implement Sort/PartitionBy, etc as they did with DataSet? Do we will also provide similar api in datastream or some other thing before we remove DataSet? Btw, as far as I see, with regarding to replcaing DataSet with Datastream, Datastream 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: "Jing Ge" <j...@ververica.com.INVALID> 收件人: "dev" <dev@flink.apache.org> 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] 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 those issues and therefore be able to remove those APIs. Best regards, Jing [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/90qc9nrlzf0vbvg92klzp9ftxxc43nbk On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 10:26 AM 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 > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >
