Hi David, Just to follow-up on that last question: I can confirm that there are no regressions for the Flink Kafka connector working with Flink 1.18. The previous nightly build failures were caused by breaking changes in test code, which has been resolved by now.
I'll be creating new releases for flink-connector-kafka 3.0.1-18 as soon as the 1.18.0 artifacts are released. Thanks, Gordon On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 1:40 AM David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> wrote: > Hi Martjin, > Thanks for your comments. I also think it is better to decouple the > connectors – I agree they need to have their own release cycles. . I was > worried that moving to Flink 1.118 is somehow causing the Kafka connector > to fail – i.e. a regression. I think you are saying that there is no > regression like this, > Kind regards, David. > From: Martijn Visser <martijnvis...@apache.org> > Date: Thursday, 5 October 2023 at 21:39 > To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0, release candidate #0 > Hi David, > > It’s a deliberate choice to decouple the connectors. We shouldn’t block > Flink 1.18 on connector statuses. There’s already work being done to fix > the Flink Kafka connector. Any Flink connector comes after the new minor > version, similar to how it has been for all other connectors with Flink > 1.17. > > Best regards, > > Martijn Visser > > Op do 5 okt 2023 om 11:33 schreef David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> > > > Hi Jing, > > Yes I agree that if we can get them resolved then that would be ideal. > > > > I guess the worry is that at 1.17, we had a released Flink core and Kafka > > connector. > > At 1.18 we will have a released Core Flink but no new Kafka connector. So > > the last released Kafka connector would now be > > > https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.flink/flink-connector-kafka/3.0.0-1.17 > > which should be the same as the Kafka connector in 1.17. I guess this is > > the combination that people would pick up to deploy in production – and I > > assume this has been tested. > > > > This issues with the nightly builds refers to kafka connector main > > branch. If they are not regressions, you are suggesting that > pragmatically > > we go forward with the release; I think that makes sense to do, but do > > these issues effect 3.0.0.-1.117. > > > > I suspect we should release a new Kafka connector asap, so we have a > > matching connector built outside of the Flink repo. We may want to not > > include the Flink core version in the connector – or we might end up > > wanting to release a Kafka connector when there are no changes just to > have > > a match with the Flink core version. > > > > Kind regards, David. > > > > > > > > From: Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.INVALID> > > Date: Wednesday, 4 October 2023 at 17:36 > > To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0, release candidate #0 > > Hi David, > > > > First of all, we should have enough time to wait for those issues to > > be resolved. Secondly, it makes less sense to block upstream release by > > downstream build issues. In case, those issues might need more time, we > > should move forward with the Flink release without waiting for them. > WDYT? > > > > Best regards, > > Jing > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 6:15 PM David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi , > > > As release 1.18 removes the kafka connector from the core Flink > > > repository, I assume we will wait until the kafka connector nightly > build > > > issues https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33104 and > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33017 are resolved > before > > > releasing 1.18? > > > > > > Kind regards, David. > > > > > > > > > From: Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.INVALID> > > > Date: Wednesday, 27 September 2023 at 15:11 > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0, release candidate #0 > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > @Ryan FYI: CI passed and the PR has been merged. Thanks! > > > > > > If there are no more other concerns, I will start publishing 1.18-rc1. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Jing > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 1:40 PM Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Ryan, > > > > > > > > Thanks for reaching out. It is fine to include it but we need to wait > > > > until the CI passes. I am not sure how long it will take, since there > > > seems > > > > to be some infra issues. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Jing > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 11:34 AM Ryan Skraba > > > <ryan.skr...@aiven.io.invalid> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hello! There's a security fix that probably should be applied to > 1.18 > > > >> in the next RC1 : https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23461 > (bump > > to > > > >> snappy-java). Do you think this would be possible to include? > > > >> > > > >> All my best, Ryan > > > >> > > > >> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33149 "Bump > > > >> snappy-java to 1.1.10.4" > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 3:54 PM Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.invalid > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks Zakelly for the update! Appreciate it! > > > >> > > > > >> > @Piotr Nowojski <pnowoj...@apache.org> If you do not have any > other > > > >> > concerns, I will move forward to create 1.18 rc1 and start voting. > > > WDYT? > > > >> > > > > >> > Best regards, > > > >> > Jing > > > >> > > > > >> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 2:20 AM Zakelly Lan < > zakelly....@gmail.com> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi Jing and everyone, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I have conducted three rounds of benchmarking with Java11, > > comparing > > > >> > > release 1.18 (commit: deb07e99560[1]) with commit > 6d62f9918ea[2]. > > > The > > > >> > > results are attached[3]. Most of the tests show no obvious > > > regression. > > > >> > > However, I did observe significant change in several tests. Upon > > > >> > > reviewing the historical results from the previous pipeline, I > > also > > > >> > > discovered a substantial variance in those tests, as shown in > the > > > >> > > timeline pictures included in the sheet[3]. I believe this > > variance > > > >> > > has existed for a long time and requires further investigation, > > and > > > >> > > fully measuring the variance requires more rounds (15 or more). > I > > > >> > > think for now it is not a blocker for release 1.18. WDYT? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Best, > > > >> > > Zakelly > > > >> > > > > > >> > > [1] > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/deb07e99560b45033a629afc3f90666ad0a32feb > > > >> > > [2] > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/6d62f9918ea2cbb8a10c705a25a4ff6deab60711 > > > >> > > [3] > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V0-duzNTgu7H6R7kioF-TAPhlqWl7Co6Q9ikTBuaULo/edit?usp=sharing > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 11:29 AM ConradJam <jam.gz...@gmail.com > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > +1 for testing with Java 17 > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.invalid> 于2023年9月24日周日 09:40写道： > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > +1 for testing with Java 17 too. Thanks Zakelly for your > > effort! > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > Jing > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:01 PM Zakelly Lan < > > > >> zakelly....@gmail.com> > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Jing, > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I agree we could wait for the result with Java 11. And it > > > >> should be > > > >> > > > > > available next Monday. > > > >> > > > > > Additionally, I could also build a pipeline with Java 17 > > later > > > >> since > > > >> > > > > > it is supported in 1.18[1]. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > > Zakelly > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > [1] > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/9c1318ca7fa5b2e7b11827068ad1288483aaa464#diff-8310c97396d60e96766a936ca8680f1e2971ef486cfc2bc55ec9ca5a5333c47fR53 > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 5:57 PM Jing Ge > > > >> <j...@ververica.com.invalid> > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi Zakelly, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for your effort and the update! Since Java 8 has > > been > > > >> > > > > > deprecated[1], > > > >> > > > > > > let's wait for the result with Java 11. It should be > > > available > > > >> > > after > > > >> > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > weekend and there should be no big surprise. WDYT? > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > > > Jing > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > [1] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/release-notes/flink-1.15/#jdk-upgrade > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:26 AM Zakelly Lan < > > > >> > > zakelly....@gmail.com> > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I want to provide an update on the benchmark results > > that > > > I > > > >> have > > > >> > > been > > > >> > > > > > > > working on. After spending some time preparing the > > > >> environment > > > >> > > and > > > >> > > > > > > > adjusting the benchmark script, I finally got a > > comparison > > > >> > > between > > > >> > > > > > > > release 1.18 (commit: 2aeb99804ba[1]) and the commit > > > before > > > >> the > > > >> > > old > > > >> > > > > > > > codespeed server went down (commit: 6d62f9918ea[2]) on > > > >> openjdk8. > > > >> > > The > > > >> > > > > > > > report is attached[3]. Note that the test has only run > > > once > > > >> on > > > >> > > jdk8, > > > >> > > > > > > > so the impact of single-test fluctuations is not ruled > > > out. > > > >> > > > > > > > Additionally, I have noticed some significant > > fluctuations > > > >> in > > > >> > > > > specific > > > >> > > > > > > > tests when reviewing previous benchmark scores, which > I > > > >> have also > > > >> > > > > > > > noted in the report. Taking all of these factors into > > > >> > > consideration, > > > >> > > > > I > > > >> > > > > > > > think there is no obvious regression in release 1.18 > > *for > > > >> now*. > > > >> > > More > > > >> > > > > > > > tests including the one on openjdk11 are on the way. > > Hope > > > it > > > >> > > does not > > > >> > > > > > > > delay the release procedure. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any concerns. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Best, > > > >> > > > > > > > Zakelly > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > [1] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/2aeb99804ba56c008df0a1730f3246d3fea856b9 > > > >> > > > > > > > [2] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/6d62f9918ea2cbb8a10c705a25a4ff6deab60711 > > > >> > > > > > > > [3] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3Y974jYq_WrQNzLN-y_6lOU-NGXaIDTQBYTZd04tJ0/edit?usp=sharing > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > The new environment for benchmark: > > > >> > > > > > > > ECS on Aliyun > > > >> > > > > > > > CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8163 CPU @ 2.50GHz (8 > > Core > > > >> > > available) > > > >> > > > > > > > Memory: 64GB > > > >> > > > > > > > OS: Alibaba Cloud Linux 3.2104 LTS 64bit > > > >> > > > > > > > Kernel: 5.10.134-15.al8.x86_64 > > > >> > > > > > > > OpenJDK8 version: 1.8.0_372 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 12:04 PM Yuxin Tan < > > > >> > > tanyuxinw...@gmail.com> > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi, Zakelly, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > No benchmark tests currently are affected by this > > issue. > > > >> We > > > >> > > > > > > > > may add benchmarks to guard it later. Thanks. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Best, > > > >> > > > > > > > > Yuxin > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Zakelly Lan <zakelly....@gmail.com> 于2023年9月21日周四 > > > >> 11:56写道： > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hi Jing, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Sure, I will run the benchmark with this fix. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hi Yunxin, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I'm not familiar with the hybrid shuffle. Is there > > any > > > >> > > specific > > > >> > > > > > > > > > benchmark test that may be affected by this > issue? I > > > >> will pay > > > >> > > > > > special > > > >> > > > > > > > > > attention to it. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Zakelly > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 10:08 AM Yuxin Tan < > > > >> > > > > tanyuxinw...@gmail.com > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi, Jing, Qingsheng, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > The fix has been backported. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Yuxin > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.invalid> > > 于2023年9月21日周四 > > > >> > > 00:42写道： > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Lijie, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for reaching out. Please backport it to > > > >> > > release-1.18. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Jing > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 4:35 PM Lijie Wang < > > > >> > > > > > > > wangdachui9...@gmail.com> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi community and release managers: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > We found a critical bug[1] of the rest > client > > a > > > >> few > > > >> > > days > > > >> > > > > ago, > > > >> > > > > > > > which > > > >> > > > > > > > > > may > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > cause the inode to be used up. Now the > > fix-PR[2] > > > >> is > > > >> > > ready > > > >> > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > > > > merging, I > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > hope to backport it to release-1.18. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any concerns. > > > >> Thanks. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-32974 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > [2] > > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23363 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Lijie > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Zakelly Lan <zakelly....@gmail.com> > > > 于2023年9月19日周二 > > > >> > > 17:26写道： > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Yuan and Jing, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I > > > >> completely > > > >> > > agree > > > >> > > > > > that > > > >> > > > > > > > it is > > > >> > > > > > > > > > our > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > top priority to ensure that there are no > > > >> regressions > > > >> > > from > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > > last > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > commit the previous benchmark pipeline > > covered > > > >> to the > > > >> > > > > final > > > >> > > > > > > > commit > > > >> > > > > > > > > > of > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > this release. I will try to get this > result > > > >> first. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Zakelly > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 4:55 PM Jing Ge > > > >> > > > > > > > <j...@ververica.com.invalid > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Zakelly and Yuan for your effort > > and > > > >> update. > > > >> > > > > > Since we > > > >> > > > > > > > > > changed > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hardware, IMHO, if we are able to reach > a > > > >> > > consensus in > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > > > > community > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there is no regression with the > > benchmarks, > > > we > > > >> > > could > > > >> > > > > > consider > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > releasing > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rc1 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without waiting for the new baseline > > scores > > > >> which > > > >> > > might > > > >> > > > > > take > > > >> > > > > > > > > > days. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jing > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 10:42 AM Yuan > Mei > > < > > > >> > > > > > > > > > yuanmei.w...@gmail.com> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Zakelly, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks very much for the efforts to > > > >> re-build the > > > >> > > > > entire > > > >> > > > > > > > > > benchmark > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > environment. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As long as we have > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) the pipeline set up and ready (no > > need > > > >> for the > > > >> > > > > > entire > > > >> > > > > > > > portal > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > ready), > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) get benchmark comparison numbers > > > >> (comparing > > > >> > > with > > > >> > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > > commit > > > >> > > > > > > > > > just > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > before > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the benchmark pipeline is down) and > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) confirmed no-regression, it should > be > > > >> good > > > >> > > enough. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again! > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yuan > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 4:26 PM > Zakelly > > > Lan > > > >> < > > > >> > > > > > > > > > zakelly....@gmail.com > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am working on rebuilding the > > benchmark > > > >> > > pipeline > > > >> > > > > and > > > >> > > > > > > > it's > > > >> > > > > > > > > > almost > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > done. However, due to the change in > > > >> machines > > > >> > > for > > > >> > > > > > > > > > benchmarking, I > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need a few more days to run tests > and > > > >> gather > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > > > baseline > > > >> > > > > > > > > > scores > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > further comparison. Once the > pipeline > > is > > > >> fully > > > >> > > > > > ready, we > > > >> > > > > > > > will > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > proceed > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with the performance test for > release > > > >> 1.18.0. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any > > > >> concerns. > > > >> > > Thank > > > >> > > > > > you > > > >> > > > > > > > all > > > >> > > > > > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > patience. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Zakelly > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 6:57 PM Jing > > Ge > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > <j...@ververica.com.invalid > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The RC0 for Apache Flink 1.18.0 > has > > > been > > > >> > > created. > > > >> > > > > > This > > > >> > > > > > > > RC > > > >> > > > > > > > > > is > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > currently > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > preview only to facilitate the > > > >> integrated > > > >> > > testing > > > >> > > > > > > > since the > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > benchmark > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tests > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not available yet[1] and the > > > release > > > >> > > > > > announcement > > > >> > > > > > > > is > > > >> > > > > > > > > > still > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > under > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > review. The RC1 will be released > > after > > > >> all > > > >> > > > > > benchmarks > > > >> > > > > > > > > > tests are > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > passed. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > related voting process will be > > > triggered > > > >> > > once the > > > >> > > > > > > > > > announcement > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ready. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The RC0 has all the artifacts that > > we > > > >> would > > > >> > > > > > typically > > > >> > > > > > > > have > > > >> > > > > > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > release, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > except for the release note and > the > > > >> website > > > >> > > pull > > > >> > > > > > > > request > > > >> > > > > > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > release > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > announcement. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The following contents are > available > > > >> for your > > > >> > > > > > review: > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - The preview source release and > > > binary > > > >> > > > > convenience > > > >> > > > > > > > > > releases > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > [2], > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > which > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are signed with the key with > > > fingerprint > > > >> > > > > > > > > > 96AE0E32CBE6E0753CE6 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > [3]. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - all artifacts that would > normally > > be > > > >> > > deployed > > > >> > > > > to > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Maven > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Central Repository [4]. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - source code tag > > "release-1.18.0-rc0" > > > >> [5] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your help testing the release will > > be > > > >> greatly > > > >> > > > > > > > appreciated! > > > >> > > > > > > > > > And > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > we'll > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > create the rc1 release and the > > voting > > > >> thread > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > > > soon as > > > >> > > > > > > > > > all the > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > finished. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33052 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [2] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flink/flink-1.18.0-rc0/ > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [3] > > > >> > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/flink/KEYS > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [4] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflink-1656/ > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [5] > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/flink/releases/tag/release-1.18.0-rc0 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Qingsheng, Sergei, Konstantin and > > Jing > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > -- > > > >> > > > Best > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ConradJam > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU > > > > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU >
