Hi Lorenzo, Bahir is retired, see the homepage. It plays no role (anymore).
> This, unfortunately, is the tradeoff for developing the connectors outside of Apache in exchange for development velocity. I understand that. It can be considered to develop the connectors outside of the Flink project, in order to achieve development velocity. We've seen a similar thing happen with the CDC connectors, before that was ultimately donated to the Flink project. However, there are no guarantees that external contributions are considered when evaluating committers, because there's no visibility for the PMC on these external contributions. Best regards, Martijn On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 3:26 PM <lorenzo.affe...@ververica.com.invalid> wrote: > @Leonard @Martijn > Following up on @Claire question, what is the role of Bahir ( > https://bahir.apache.org/) in this scenario? > > I am also trying to understand how connectors fir in the Flink project > scenario :) > > Thank you, > Lorenzo > On Apr 2, 2024 at 06:13 +0200, Leonard Xu <xbjt...@gmail.com>, wrote: > > Hey, Claire > > > > Thanks starting this discussion, all flink external connector repos are > sub-projects of Apache Flink, including > https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-aws. > > > > Creating a flink external connector repo named flink-connectors-gcp as > sub-project of Apache Beam is not a good idea from my side. > > > > > Currently, we have no Flink committers on our team. We are actively > > > involved in the Apache Beam community and have a number of ASF members > on > > > the team. > > > > Not having Flink committer should not be a strong reason in this case, > Flink community welcome contributors to contribute and maintain the > connectors, as a contributor, through continuous connector development and > maintenance work in the community, you will also have the opportunity to > become a Committer. > > > > Best, > > Leonard > > > > > > > 2024年2月14日 上午12:24，Claire McCarthy <clairemccar...@google.com.INVALID> > 写道： > > > > > > Hi Devs! > > > > > > I’d like to kick off a discussion on setting up a repo for a new fleet > of > > > Google Cloud connectors. > > > > > > A bit of context: > > > > > > - > > > > > > We have a team of Google engineers who are looking to build/maintain > > > 5-10 GCP connectors for Flink. > > > - > > > > > > We are wondering if it would make sense to host our connectors under > the > > > ASF umbrella following a similar repo structure as AWS ( > > > https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-aws). In our case: > > > apache/flink-connectors-gcp. > > > - > > > > > > Currently, we have no Flink committers on our team. We are actively > > > involved in the Apache Beam community and have a number of ASF members > on > > > the team. > > > > > > > > > We saw that one of the original motivations for externalizing > connectors > > > was to encourage more activity and contributions around connectors by > > > easing the contribution overhead. We understand that the decision was > > > ultimately made to host the externalized connector repos under the ASF > > > organization. For the same reasons (release infra, quality assurance, > > > integration with the community, etc.), we would like all GCP > connectors to > > > live under the ASF organization. > > > > > > We want to ask the Flink community what you all think of this idea, and > > > what would be the best way for us to go about contributing something > like > > > this. We are excited to contribute and want to learn and follow your > > > practices. > > > > > > A specific issue we know of is that our changes need approval from > Flink > > > committers. Do you have a suggestion for how best to go about a new > > > contribution like ours from a team that does not have committers? Is it > > > possible, for example, to partner with a committer (or a small cohort) > for > > > tight engagement? We also know about ASF voting and release process, > but > > > that doesn't seem to be as much of a potential hurdle. > > > > > > Huge thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts! > > > > > > > > > Claire > > >
