Hi, Thanks for keeping us in the loop. +1 for merging these PRs.
@Alex Please feel free to contact us for CR and PR merges. @Matthias the Pekko migration is an important task, since it is related to CVE issues. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. Best regards, Jing On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 5:23 PM Qingsheng Ren <re...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks for letting us know, Matthias! > > As discussed in the release sync, +1 for merging these PRs. > > Best, > Qingsheng > > On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 5:17 PM Matthias Pohl <matthias.p...@aiven.io> > wrote: > > > I'm requesting to merge in FLINK-32098 [1]. It's a minor change that > > reduces the amount of exists calls to S3 while submitting a job (which > can > > be an expensive operation if the object actually doesn't exist but the > > corresponding bucket itself contains a lot of objects). The PR is > reviewed > > and ready to be merged. The change itself is minor and covered by > existing > > tests. > > > > Additionally, I want to mention the two already merged (after > > feature-freeze) changes: > > - FLINK-32583 [2] which is a minor bugfix. I didn't explicitly mention it > > initially because of the fact that it fixes a bug (which admittedly was > > already present in older versions of Flink). I'm happy to revert that one > > if the release managers have concerns. It's fixing a scenario where the > > RestClient becomes unresponsive when submitting a request in rare cases. > > - Migration from Akka to Pekko (FLINK-32468 [3], FLINK-32683 [4]): This > > was agreed on in last week's 1.18 release sync. I just forgot to make it > > public on the ML. The Pekko change will be "release-tested" as part of > > FLINK-32678 stress test. > > > > Matthias > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-32098 > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-32583 > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-32468 > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-32683 > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-32678 > > > > On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 10:58 AM Qingsheng Ren <re...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Thanks for letting us know, Alexander and Leonard! > >> > >> I checked these PRs and the changes are trivial. +1 for merging them. > >> > >> Best, > >> Qingsheng > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 12:14 AM Leonard Xu <xbjt...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Thank all Release Managers for driving the 1.18 release work! > >> > > >> > > - Deprecation works for 2.0 > >> > > > >> > > As discussed in another thread [3], we will not give extra > extensions > >> to > >> > > deprecation works considering the overhead and potential side > effects > >> to > >> > > the timeline of 1.18. We can accept tiny changes that only add > >> > annotations > >> > > and JavaDocs, but please let us know before you are going to do > that. > >> > > >> > Alexander and I ready to deprecate SourceFunction APIs as above > >> discussion > >> > thread[1][2], now we apply the permission to merge following three > PRs : > >> > > >> > The first two PRs [3][4] only contains @Deprecated annotations and > >> > JavaDocs, the PR[5] contains @Deprecated annotations, JavaDocs, and > >> > necessary tiny changes for example code as some examples with strict > >> > deprecation compiler checks to SourceFunction API, it should be okay > as > >> it > >> > only changed example code, you can check the tiny change in this > >> commit[5]. > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > Alexander and Leonard > >> > > >> > [1]https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k > >> > [2]https://lists.apache.org/thread/kv9rj3w2rmkb8jtss5bqffhw57or7v8v > >> > [3]https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23106 > >> > [4]https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23079 > >> > [5]https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23105 > >> > [6] > >> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23079/commits/f5ea3c073d36f21fb4fe47e83c717ac080995509 > >> > > >> > > >> > > >
