Hi Ahmed! As I mentioned in the first email, the Flink Operator explicitly aims to make running Flink and Flink Platforms on Kubernetes easy. As most users are platform teams supporting Flink inside a company or running a service it's basically always required to support several Flink versions at the same time.
Enterprise users are in many cases using Flink versions that are older than the last 2 minor releases (currently supported by the community). However the operator itself is somewhat independent of Flink itself, and most operator features work across several Flink versions at the same time. Based on this it's relatively easy for us to support deploying to previous Flink minor versions (within some reasonable limit). This means that as long as platform teams keep the operator up-to-date they get the latest stability / deployment improvements but can still provide compatibility for their users for older Flink job versions. Cheers, Gyula On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:59 PM Ahmed Hamdy <hamdy10...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Gyula, > +1 for the proposal in general. > May I ask why are we interested in supporting more than the ones supported > by the community? > for example I understand all versions prior to 1.16 are now out of support, > why should we tie our compatibility 4 versions behind? > Best Regards > Ahmed Hamdy > > > On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 12:18, ConradJam <jam.gz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Yang Wang <wangyang0...@apache.org> 于2023年9月14日周四 16:15写道： > > > > > Since the users could always use the old Flink Kubernetes Operator > > version > > > along with old Flink versions, I am totally in favor of this proposal > to > > > reduce maintenance burden. > > > > > > Best, > > > Yang > > > > > > Biao Geng <biaoge...@gmail.com> 于2023年9月6日周三 18:15写道： > > > > > > > +1 for the proposal. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Biao Geng > > > > > > > > Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> 于2023年9月6日周三 16:10写道： > > > > > > > > > @Zhanghao Chen: > > > > > > > > > > I am not completely sure at this point what this will mean for 2.0 > > > simply > > > > > because I am also not sure what that will mean for the operator as > > well > > > > :) > > > > > I think this will depend on the compatibility guarantees we can > > provide > > > > > across Flink major versions in general. We have to look into that > and > > > > > tackle the question there independently. > > > > > > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 6:12 PM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 Sounds good! Four releases give a decent amount of time to > > migrate > > > > > > to the next Flink version. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 5:33 PM Őrhidi Mátyás < > > > matyas.orh...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 8:03 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1, thanks for the proposal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 8:13 AM Gyula Fóra < > > gyula.f...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> has raised the > question > > > of > > > > > > Flink > > > > > > > > > version support in the operator before the last release. I > > > would > > > > > > like to > > > > > > > > > open this discussion publicly so we can finalize this > before > > > the > > > > > next > > > > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Background: > > > > > > > > > Currently the Flink Operator supports all Flink versions > > since > > > > > Flink > > > > > > > > 1.13. > > > > > > > > > While this is great for the users, it introduces a lot of > > > > backward > > > > > > > > > compatibility related code in the operator logic and also > > adds > > > > > > > > considerable > > > > > > > > > time to the CI. We should strike a reasonable balance here > > that > > > > > > allows us > > > > > > > > > to move forward and eliminate some of this tech debt. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the current model it is also impossible to support all > > > > features > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > Flink versions which leads to some confusion over time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposal: > > > > > > > > > Since it's a key feature of the kubernetes operator to > > support > > > > > > several > > > > > > > > > versions at the same time, I propose to support the last 4 > > > stable > > > > > > Flink > > > > > > > > > minor versions. Currently this would mean to support Flink > > > > > 1.14-1.17 > > > > > > (and > > > > > > > > > drop 1.13 support). When Flink 1.18 is released we would > drop > > > > 1.14 > > > > > > > > support > > > > > > > > > and so on. Given the Flink release cadence this means > about 2 > > > > year > > > > > > > > support > > > > > > > > > for each Flink version. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
