Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Thank you all for the questions/suggestions! After some questions/clarifications there are only +1 on the discussion. Unless there are further questions/objections I'm intended to merge the related PR in 24 hours: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359 G On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 10:53 AM Gabor Somogyi wrote: > Hi Xingbo, > > Thanks for your support! > > I agree that multi-platform in general is a good idea. We start with ARM > but this opens the door for all others. > > G > > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 10:46 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > >> Hi Gabor, >> >> Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation. Building a test environment >> with >> multi-platforms is indeed what we have been lacking, >> not only for M1 users, but also for Windows users. At 1.16, I remember >> that >> Azure did not provide the m1 environment, >> and the github action just planned m1 in the annual plan at that >> time[1][2]. >> >> +1 for drop 3.7 support in 1.19 >> >> [1] https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/2187 >> [2] https://github.com/github/roadmap/issues/528 >> >> Best, >> Xingbo >> >> Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 16:07写道： >> >> > Hi Xingbo, >> > >> > > So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 >> > > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this >> > > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? >> > >> > In short yes + local wheel build fix on the M1. In a bit more detailed >> > please let me elaborate. >> > >> > You're right about the arm64 build creation, Flink is doing that for >> quite >> > some time already and wheels are running fine. >> > There are gaps however. >> > >> > From user perspective: >> > * we're building wheels for ARM64 but we're not executing any python >> tests >> > on ARM64 but only on X64. >> > I think it's a must to test platform packages on the related platform >> since >> > not all python packages are ARM compatible or must be built/used in a >> > different way. >> > >> > From dev perspective: >> > * Local MacOs M1 wheel or python source distro builds are simply failing >> > with error messages. >> > Just to give an example GRPC pip install is failing and require the >> > following changes: >> > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359/files#diff-c4c4916cd6ab7f87a4b154ef9603f9ba6d3b74a00096be9adacb7df363b5efcfR28-R32 >> > I can't really imagine how Azure is able to build MacOS ARM64 wheels... >> > * Python tests are not running on any kind of ARM CPUs which makes any >> bug >> > hunting/development hard or nearly impossible >> > >> > In order to give ARM support with local development + test execution >> > possibility new miniconda is needed. New miniconda runs 3.8+. >> > >> > There is already a PR which is under development: >> > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359 >> > This fills all the mentioned gaps: local test/development/test >> execution on >> > ARM CPUs + the previously mentioned 3+ years not actively supported >> python >> > eliminated. >> > >> > Hope this helps. >> > >> > G >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:00 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Gyala and Gabor, >> > > >> > > Pyflink has provided arm64 wheel packages for Apple silicon since >> > 1.16[1]. >> > > The use of Miniconda is only related to ci testing and packaging on >> linux >> > > platform, and building mac platform wheels are dependent on >> > > cibuildwheel[2]. So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 >> > > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this >> > > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? >> > > >> > > [1] https://pypi.org/project/apache-flink/1.16.2/#files >> > > [2] >> > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/tools/azure-pipelines/build-python-wheels.yml#L30 >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > Xingbo >> > > >> > > Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 14:36写道： >> > > >> > > > Hi Xingbo, >> > > > >> > > > *Constraint:* >> > > > I personally not found any miniconda version which provides arm64 >> > support >> > > > together with python 3.7. >> > > > [image: image.png] >> > > > >> > > > At the moment I think new platform support means 3.7 drop. >> > > > >> > > > I fully to agree with Gyula, if we start now maybe we can release >> it in >> > > > half a year however *3.7 active support already ended in 27 Jun >> 2020*. >> > > > At the moment any python development/test execution on MacOS M1 is >> just >> > > > not working as-is just like any kind of python test execution on any >> > ARM >> > > > CPU. >> > > > >> > > > Gains: >> > > > * We can release a working version in half a year hopefully and not >> > > > shifting support to 1+ year >> > > > * MacOS M1 local development would work finally which is essential >> for >> > > > user engagement >> > > > * It would be possible to execute python tests on ARM64 machines >> > > > * We can shake up the python development story because it's not the >> > most >> > > > loved area >> > > > >> > > > BR, >> > > > G >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Wed
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Xingbo, Thanks for your support! I agree that multi-platform in general is a good idea. We start with ARM but this opens the door for all others. G On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 10:46 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > Hi Gabor, > > Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation. Building a test environment with > multi-platforms is indeed what we have been lacking, > not only for M1 users, but also for Windows users. At 1.16, I remember that > Azure did not provide the m1 environment, > and the github action just planned m1 in the annual plan at that > time[1][2]. > > +1 for drop 3.7 support in 1.19 > > [1] https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/2187 > [2] https://github.com/github/roadmap/issues/528 > > Best, > Xingbo > > Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 16:07写道： > > > Hi Xingbo, > > > > > So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 > > > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this > > > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? > > > > In short yes + local wheel build fix on the M1. In a bit more detailed > > please let me elaborate. > > > > You're right about the arm64 build creation, Flink is doing that for > quite > > some time already and wheels are running fine. > > There are gaps however. > > > > From user perspective: > > * we're building wheels for ARM64 but we're not executing any python > tests > > on ARM64 but only on X64. > > I think it's a must to test platform packages on the related platform > since > > not all python packages are ARM compatible or must be built/used in a > > different way. > > > > From dev perspective: > > * Local MacOs M1 wheel or python source distro builds are simply failing > > with error messages. > > Just to give an example GRPC pip install is failing and require the > > following changes: > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359/files#diff-c4c4916cd6ab7f87a4b154ef9603f9ba6d3b74a00096be9adacb7df363b5efcfR28-R32 > > I can't really imagine how Azure is able to build MacOS ARM64 wheels... > > * Python tests are not running on any kind of ARM CPUs which makes any > bug > > hunting/development hard or nearly impossible > > > > In order to give ARM support with local development + test execution > > possibility new miniconda is needed. New miniconda runs 3.8+. > > > > There is already a PR which is under development: > > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359 > > This fills all the mentioned gaps: local test/development/test execution > on > > ARM CPUs + the previously mentioned 3+ years not actively supported > python > > eliminated. > > > > Hope this helps. > > > > G > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:00 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > > > > > Hi Gyala and Gabor, > > > > > > Pyflink has provided arm64 wheel packages for Apple silicon since > > 1.16[1]. > > > The use of Miniconda is only related to ci testing and packaging on > linux > > > platform, and building mac platform wheels are dependent on > > > cibuildwheel[2]. So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 > > > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this > > > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? > > > > > > [1] https://pypi.org/project/apache-flink/1.16.2/#files > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/tools/azure-pipelines/build-python-wheels.yml#L30 > > > > > > Best, > > > Xingbo > > > > > > Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 14:36写道： > > > > > > > Hi Xingbo, > > > > > > > > *Constraint:* > > > > I personally not found any miniconda version which provides arm64 > > support > > > > together with python 3.7. > > > > [image: image.png] > > > > > > > > At the moment I think new platform support means 3.7 drop. > > > > > > > > I fully to agree with Gyula, if we start now maybe we can release it > in > > > > half a year however *3.7 active support already ended in 27 Jun > 2020*. > > > > At the moment any python development/test execution on MacOS M1 is > just > > > > not working as-is just like any kind of python test execution on any > > ARM > > > > CPU. > > > > > > > > Gains: > > > > * We can release a working version in half a year hopefully and not > > > > shifting support to 1+ year > > > > * MacOS M1 local development would work finally which is essential > for > > > > user engagement > > > > * It would be possible to execute python tests on ARM64 machines > > > > * We can shake up the python development story because it's not the > > most > > > > loved area > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > G > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 8:06 AM Gyula Fóra > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi Xingbo! > > > >> > > > >> I think we have to analyze what we gain by dropping 3.7 and > upgrading > > > to a > > > >> miniconda version with a multiarch support. > > > >> > > > >> If this is what we need to get Apple silicon support then I think > it's > > > >> worth doing it already in 1.19. Keep in mind that 1.18 is not even > > > >> released > > > >> yet so if we delay this to 1.20 that is basically
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Gabor, Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation. Building a test environment with multi-platforms is indeed what we have been lacking, not only for M1 users, but also for Windows users. At 1.16, I remember that Azure did not provide the m1 environment, and the github action just planned m1 in the annual plan at that time[1][2]. +1 for drop 3.7 support in 1.19 [1] https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/2187 [2] https://github.com/github/roadmap/issues/528 Best, Xingbo Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 16:07写道： > Hi Xingbo, > > > So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 > > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this > > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? > > In short yes + local wheel build fix on the M1. In a bit more detailed > please let me elaborate. > > You're right about the arm64 build creation, Flink is doing that for quite > some time already and wheels are running fine. > There are gaps however. > > From user perspective: > * we're building wheels for ARM64 but we're not executing any python tests > on ARM64 but only on X64. > I think it's a must to test platform packages on the related platform since > not all python packages are ARM compatible or must be built/used in a > different way. > > From dev perspective: > * Local MacOs M1 wheel or python source distro builds are simply failing > with error messages. > Just to give an example GRPC pip install is failing and require the > following changes: > > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359/files#diff-c4c4916cd6ab7f87a4b154ef9603f9ba6d3b74a00096be9adacb7df363b5efcfR28-R32 > I can't really imagine how Azure is able to build MacOS ARM64 wheels... > * Python tests are not running on any kind of ARM CPUs which makes any bug > hunting/development hard or nearly impossible > > In order to give ARM support with local development + test execution > possibility new miniconda is needed. New miniconda runs 3.8+. > > There is already a PR which is under development: > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359 > This fills all the mentioned gaps: local test/development/test execution on > ARM CPUs + the previously mentioned 3+ years not actively supported python > eliminated. > > Hope this helps. > > G > > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:00 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > > > Hi Gyala and Gabor, > > > > Pyflink has provided arm64 wheel packages for Apple silicon since > 1.16[1]. > > The use of Miniconda is only related to ci testing and packaging on linux > > platform, and building mac platform wheels are dependent on > > cibuildwheel[2]. So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 > > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this > > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? > > > > [1] https://pypi.org/project/apache-flink/1.16.2/#files > > [2] > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/tools/azure-pipelines/build-python-wheels.yml#L30 > > > > Best, > > Xingbo > > > > Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 14:36写道： > > > > > Hi Xingbo, > > > > > > *Constraint:* > > > I personally not found any miniconda version which provides arm64 > support > > > together with python 3.7. > > > [image: image.png] > > > > > > At the moment I think new platform support means 3.7 drop. > > > > > > I fully to agree with Gyula, if we start now maybe we can release it in > > > half a year however *3.7 active support already ended in 27 Jun 2020*. > > > At the moment any python development/test execution on MacOS M1 is just > > > not working as-is just like any kind of python test execution on any > ARM > > > CPU. > > > > > > Gains: > > > * We can release a working version in half a year hopefully and not > > > shifting support to 1+ year > > > * MacOS M1 local development would work finally which is essential for > > > user engagement > > > * It would be possible to execute python tests on ARM64 machines > > > * We can shake up the python development story because it's not the > most > > > loved area > > > > > > BR, > > > G > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 8:06 AM Gyula Fóra > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Xingbo! > > >> > > >> I think we have to analyze what we gain by dropping 3.7 and upgrading > > to a > > >> miniconda version with a multiarch support. > > >> > > >> If this is what we need to get Apple silicon support then I think it's > > >> worth doing it already in 1.19. Keep in mind that 1.18 is not even > > >> released > > >> yet so if we delay this to 1.20 that is basically 1 year from now. > > >> Making this change can increase the adoption instantly if we enable > new > > >> platforms. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Gyula > > >> > > >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:46 AM Xingbo Huang > wrote: > > >> > > >> > Hi Gabor, > > >> > > > >> > Thanks for bringing this up. In my opinion, it is a bit aggressive > to > > >> > directly drop Python 3.7 in 1.19. Python 3.7 is still used a lot[1], > > >> and as > > >> > far as I know, many Pyflink users are still using python 3.7
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Xingbo, > So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? In short yes + local wheel build fix on the M1. In a bit more detailed please let me elaborate. You're right about the arm64 build creation, Flink is doing that for quite some time already and wheels are running fine. There are gaps however. >From user perspective: * we're building wheels for ARM64 but we're not executing any python tests on ARM64 but only on X64. I think it's a must to test platform packages on the related platform since not all python packages are ARM compatible or must be built/used in a different way. >From dev perspective: * Local MacOs M1 wheel or python source distro builds are simply failing with error messages. Just to give an example GRPC pip install is failing and require the following changes: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359/files#diff-c4c4916cd6ab7f87a4b154ef9603f9ba6d3b74a00096be9adacb7df363b5efcfR28-R32 I can't really imagine how Azure is able to build MacOS ARM64 wheels... * Python tests are not running on any kind of ARM CPUs which makes any bug hunting/development hard or nearly impossible In order to give ARM support with local development + test execution possibility new miniconda is needed. New miniconda runs 3.8+. There is already a PR which is under development: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23359 This fills all the mentioned gaps: local test/development/test execution on ARM CPUs + the previously mentioned 3+ years not actively supported python eliminated. Hope this helps. G On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:00 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > Hi Gyala and Gabor, > > Pyflink has provided arm64 wheel packages for Apple silicon since 1.16[1]. > The use of Miniconda is only related to ci testing and packaging on linux > platform, and building mac platform wheels are dependent on > cibuildwheel[2]. So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 > environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this > requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? > > [1] https://pypi.org/project/apache-flink/1.16.2/#files > [2] > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/tools/azure-pipelines/build-python-wheels.yml#L30 > > Best, > Xingbo > > Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 14:36写道： > > > Hi Xingbo, > > > > *Constraint:* > > I personally not found any miniconda version which provides arm64 support > > together with python 3.7. > > [image: image.png] > > > > At the moment I think new platform support means 3.7 drop. > > > > I fully to agree with Gyula, if we start now maybe we can release it in > > half a year however *3.7 active support already ended in 27 Jun 2020*. > > At the moment any python development/test execution on MacOS M1 is just > > not working as-is just like any kind of python test execution on any ARM > > CPU. > > > > Gains: > > * We can release a working version in half a year hopefully and not > > shifting support to 1+ year > > * MacOS M1 local development would work finally which is essential for > > user engagement > > * It would be possible to execute python tests on ARM64 machines > > * We can shake up the python development story because it's not the most > > loved area > > > > BR, > > G > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 8:06 AM Gyula Fóra wrote: > > > >> Hi Xingbo! > >> > >> I think we have to analyze what we gain by dropping 3.7 and upgrading > to a > >> miniconda version with a multiarch support. > >> > >> If this is what we need to get Apple silicon support then I think it's > >> worth doing it already in 1.19. Keep in mind that 1.18 is not even > >> released > >> yet so if we delay this to 1.20 that is basically 1 year from now. > >> Making this change can increase the adoption instantly if we enable new > >> platforms. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Gyula > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:46 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Gabor, > >> > > >> > Thanks for bringing this up. In my opinion, it is a bit aggressive to > >> > directly drop Python 3.7 in 1.19. Python 3.7 is still used a lot[1], > >> and as > >> > far as I know, many Pyflink users are still using python 3.7 as their > >> > default interpreter. I prefer to deprecate Python 3.7 in 1.19 just > like > >> we > >> > deprecated Python 3.6 in 1.16[2] and dropped Python 3.6 in 1.17[3]. > >> > > >> > For the support of Python 3.11, I am very supportive of the > >> implementation > >> > in 1.19 (many users have this appeal, and I originally wanted to > >> support it > >> > in 1.18). > >> > > >> > Regarding the miniconda upgrade, I tend to upgrade miniconda to the > >> latest > >> > version that can support python 3.7 to 3.11 at the same time. > >> > > >> > [1] https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/pl-python/3 > >> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-28195 > >> > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > Xingbo >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Gyala and Gabor, Pyflink has provided arm64 wheel packages for Apple silicon since 1.16[1]. The use of Miniconda is only related to ci testing and packaging on linux platform, and building mac platform wheels are dependent on cibuildwheel[2]. So I guess you want to run ci tests on the m1 environment, but the current version of miniconda cannot meet this requirement, so there is a pre-step that must drop python 3.7? [1] https://pypi.org/project/apache-flink/1.16.2/#files [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/tools/azure-pipelines/build-python-wheels.yml#L30 Best, Xingbo Gabor Somogyi 于2023年9月6日周三 14:36写道： > Hi Xingbo, > > *Constraint:* > I personally not found any miniconda version which provides arm64 support > together with python 3.7. > [image: image.png] > > At the moment I think new platform support means 3.7 drop. > > I fully to agree with Gyula, if we start now maybe we can release it in > half a year however *3.7 active support already ended in 27 Jun 2020*. > At the moment any python development/test execution on MacOS M1 is just > not working as-is just like any kind of python test execution on any ARM > CPU. > > Gains: > * We can release a working version in half a year hopefully and not > shifting support to 1+ year > * MacOS M1 local development would work finally which is essential for > user engagement > * It would be possible to execute python tests on ARM64 machines > * We can shake up the python development story because it's not the most > loved area > > BR, > G > > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 8:06 AM Gyula Fóra wrote: > >> Hi Xingbo! >> >> I think we have to analyze what we gain by dropping 3.7 and upgrading to a >> miniconda version with a multiarch support. >> >> If this is what we need to get Apple silicon support then I think it's >> worth doing it already in 1.19. Keep in mind that 1.18 is not even >> released >> yet so if we delay this to 1.20 that is basically 1 year from now. >> Making this change can increase the adoption instantly if we enable new >> platforms. >> >> Cheers, >> Gyula >> >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:46 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: >> >> > Hi Gabor, >> > >> > Thanks for bringing this up. In my opinion, it is a bit aggressive to >> > directly drop Python 3.7 in 1.19. Python 3.7 is still used a lot[1], >> and as >> > far as I know, many Pyflink users are still using python 3.7 as their >> > default interpreter. I prefer to deprecate Python 3.7 in 1.19 just like >> we >> > deprecated Python 3.6 in 1.16[2] and dropped Python 3.6 in 1.17[3]. >> > >> > For the support of Python 3.11, I am very supportive of the >> implementation >> > in 1.19 (many users have this appeal, and I originally wanted to >> support it >> > in 1.18). >> > >> > Regarding the miniconda upgrade, I tend to upgrade miniconda to the >> latest >> > version that can support python 3.7 to 3.11 at the same time. >> > >> > [1] https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/pl-python/3 >> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-28195 >> > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 >> > >> > Best, >> > Xingbo >> > >> > Jing Ge 于2023年9月5日周二 04:10写道： >> > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > @Dian should we add support of python 3.11 >> > > >> > > Best regards, >> > > Jing >> > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 3:39 PM Gabor Somogyi < >> gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Thanks for all the responses! >> > > > >> > > > Based on the suggestions I've created the following jiras and >> started >> > to >> > > > work on them: >> > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33029 >> > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33030 >> > > > >> > > > The reason why I've split them is to separate the concerns and >> reduce >> > the >> > > > amount of code in a PR to help reviewers. >> > > > >> > > > BR, >> > > > G >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:57 PM Sergey Nuyanzin < >> snuyan...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > +1, >> > > > > Thanks for looking into this. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:38 AM Gyula Fóra >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > +1 >> > > > > > Thanks for looking into this. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Gyula >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl < >> > matthias.p...@aiven.io >> > > > > > .invalid> >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me >> as >> > > well. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi < >> > > > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi Gabor, >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped >> > Python >> > > > 3.6 >> > > > > > due >> > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it >> makes >> > > > sense >> > > > > to >> > > > > > > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. >> > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Xingbo, *Constraint:* I personally not found any miniconda version which provides arm64 support together with python 3.7. [image: image.png] At the moment I think new platform support means 3.7 drop. I fully to agree with Gyula, if we start now maybe we can release it in half a year however *3.7 active support already ended in 27 Jun 2020*. At the moment any python development/test execution on MacOS M1 is just not working as-is just like any kind of python test execution on any ARM CPU. Gains: * We can release a working version in half a year hopefully and not shifting support to 1+ year * MacOS M1 local development would work finally which is essential for user engagement * It would be possible to execute python tests on ARM64 machines * We can shake up the python development story because it's not the most loved area BR, G On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 8:06 AM Gyula Fóra wrote: > Hi Xingbo! > > I think we have to analyze what we gain by dropping 3.7 and upgrading to a > miniconda version with a multiarch support. > > If this is what we need to get Apple silicon support then I think it's > worth doing it already in 1.19. Keep in mind that 1.18 is not even released > yet so if we delay this to 1.20 that is basically 1 year from now. > Making this change can increase the adoption instantly if we enable new > platforms. > > Cheers, > Gyula > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:46 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. In my opinion, it is a bit aggressive to > > directly drop Python 3.7 in 1.19. Python 3.7 is still used a lot[1], and > as > > far as I know, many Pyflink users are still using python 3.7 as their > > default interpreter. I prefer to deprecate Python 3.7 in 1.19 just like > we > > deprecated Python 3.6 in 1.16[2] and dropped Python 3.6 in 1.17[3]. > > > > For the support of Python 3.11, I am very supportive of the > implementation > > in 1.19 (many users have this appeal, and I originally wanted to support > it > > in 1.18). > > > > Regarding the miniconda upgrade, I tend to upgrade miniconda to the > latest > > version that can support python 3.7 to 3.11 at the same time. > > > > [1] https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/pl-python/3 > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-28195 > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > > > Best, > > Xingbo > > > > Jing Ge 于2023年9月5日周二 04:10写道： > > > > > +1 > > > > > > @Dian should we add support of python 3.11 > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Jing > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 3:39 PM Gabor Somogyi < > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for all the responses! > > > > > > > > Based on the suggestions I've created the following jiras and started > > to > > > > work on them: > > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33029 > > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33030 > > > > > > > > The reason why I've split them is to separate the concerns and reduce > > the > > > > amount of code in a PR to help reviewers. > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > G > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:57 PM Sergey Nuyanzin > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1, > > > > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:38 AM Gyula Fóra > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > > > > > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl < > > matthias.p...@aiven.io > > > > > > .invalid> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi < > > > > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped > > Python > > > > 3.6 > > > > > > due > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it > makes > > > > sense > > > > > to > > > > > > > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Marton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi < > > > > > > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found > some > > > > > > > improvement > > > > > > > > > possibilities. > > > > > > > > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Intention: > > > > > > > > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate > > > > end-of-life > > > > > > > issues > > > > > > > > > and
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Xingbo! I think we have to analyze what we gain by dropping 3.7 and upgrading to a miniconda version with a multiarch support. If this is what we need to get Apple silicon support then I think it's worth doing it already in 1.19. Keep in mind that 1.18 is not even released yet so if we delay this to 1.20 that is basically 1 year from now. Making this change can increase the adoption instantly if we enable new platforms. Cheers, Gyula On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:46 AM Xingbo Huang wrote: > Hi Gabor, > > Thanks for bringing this up. In my opinion, it is a bit aggressive to > directly drop Python 3.7 in 1.19. Python 3.7 is still used a lot[1], and as > far as I know, many Pyflink users are still using python 3.7 as their > default interpreter. I prefer to deprecate Python 3.7 in 1.19 just like we > deprecated Python 3.6 in 1.16[2] and dropped Python 3.6 in 1.17[3]. > > For the support of Python 3.11, I am very supportive of the implementation > in 1.19 (many users have this appeal, and I originally wanted to support it > in 1.18). > > Regarding the miniconda upgrade, I tend to upgrade miniconda to the latest > version that can support python 3.7 to 3.11 at the same time. > > [1] https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/pl-python/3 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-28195 > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > Best, > Xingbo > > Jing Ge 于2023年9月5日周二 04:10写道： > > > +1 > > > > @Dian should we add support of python 3.11 > > > > Best regards, > > Jing > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 3:39 PM Gabor Somogyi > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks for all the responses! > > > > > > Based on the suggestions I've created the following jiras and started > to > > > work on them: > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33029 > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33030 > > > > > > The reason why I've split them is to separate the concerns and reduce > the > > > amount of code in a PR to help reviewers. > > > > > > BR, > > > G > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:57 PM Sergey Nuyanzin > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1, > > > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:38 AM Gyula Fóra > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > > > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl < > matthias.p...@aiven.io > > > > > .invalid> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi < > > > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped > Python > > > 3.6 > > > > > due > > > > > > to > > > > > > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes > > > sense > > > > to > > > > > > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > Marton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi < > > > > > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some > > > > > > improvement > > > > > > > > possibilities. > > > > > > > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Intention: > > > > > > > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate > > > end-of-life > > > > > > issues > > > > > > > > and keep up with bugfixes > > > > > > > > * start to add python arm64 support > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actual situation: > > > > > > > > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, > 3.9, > > > 3.10 > > > > > > > > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system > and > > > > > > > environment > > > > > > > > management system) which supports the following python > > versions: > > > > 3.7, > > > > > > > 3.8, > > > > > > > > 3.9, 3.10 > > > > > > > > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Issues: > > > > > > > > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. > > > This > > > > > > > version > > > > > > > > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > > > > > > > > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > > > > > > > > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years > > old > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and > ppc64le) > > > > > > > > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set > > > > supports > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Gabor, Thanks for bringing this up. In my opinion, it is a bit aggressive to directly drop Python 3.7 in 1.19. Python 3.7 is still used a lot[1], and as far as I know, many Pyflink users are still using python 3.7 as their default interpreter. I prefer to deprecate Python 3.7 in 1.19 just like we deprecated Python 3.6 in 1.16[2] and dropped Python 3.6 in 1.17[3]. For the support of Python 3.11, I am very supportive of the implementation in 1.19 (many users have this appeal, and I originally wanted to support it in 1.18). Regarding the miniconda upgrade, I tend to upgrade miniconda to the latest version that can support python 3.7 to 3.11 at the same time. [1] https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/pl-python/3 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-28195 [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 Best, Xingbo Jing Ge 于2023年9月5日周二 04:10写道： > +1 > > @Dian should we add support of python 3.11 > > Best regards, > Jing > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 3:39 PM Gabor Somogyi > wrote: > > > Thanks for all the responses! > > > > Based on the suggestions I've created the following jiras and started to > > work on them: > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33029 > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33030 > > > > The reason why I've split them is to separate the concerns and reduce the > > amount of code in a PR to help reviewers. > > > > BR, > > G > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:57 PM Sergey Nuyanzin > > wrote: > > > > > +1, > > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:38 AM Gyula Fóra > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl > > > .invalid> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as > well. > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi < > > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped Python > > 3.6 > > > > due > > > > > to > > > > > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes > > sense > > > to > > > > > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Marton > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi < > > > > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some > > > > > improvement > > > > > > > possibilities. > > > > > > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Intention: > > > > > > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate > > end-of-life > > > > > issues > > > > > > > and keep up with bugfixes > > > > > > > * start to add python arm64 support > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actual situation: > > > > > > > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, > > 3.10 > > > > > > > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system and > > > > > > environment > > > > > > > management system) which supports the following python > versions: > > > 3.7, > > > > > > 3.8, > > > > > > > 3.9, 3.10 > > > > > > > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Issues: > > > > > > > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. > > This > > > > > > version > > > > > > > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > > > > > > > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > > > > > > > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years > old > > > > > already > > > > > > > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and ppc64le) > > > > > > > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set > > > supports > > > > > the > > > > > > > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 > > support > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggestion to solve the issues: > > > > > > > * In 1.19 drop python 3.7 support and upgrade miniconda to the > > > latest > > > > > > > version which opens the door to other platform + python 3.11 > > > support > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please note python 3.11 support is not initiated/discussed > here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > > G > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Sergey > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
+1 @Dian should we add support of python 3.11 Best regards, Jing On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 3:39 PM Gabor Somogyi wrote: > Thanks for all the responses! > > Based on the suggestions I've created the following jiras and started to > work on them: > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33029 > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33030 > > The reason why I've split them is to separate the concerns and reduce the > amount of code in a PR to help reviewers. > > BR, > G > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:57 PM Sergey Nuyanzin > wrote: > > > +1, > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:38 AM Gyula Fóra wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl > > .invalid> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as well. > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi < > > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped Python > 3.6 > > > due > > > > to > > > > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes > sense > > to > > > > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Marton > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi < > > > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some > > > > improvement > > > > > > possibilities. > > > > > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > Intention: > > > > > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate > end-of-life > > > > issues > > > > > > and keep up with bugfixes > > > > > > * start to add python arm64 support > > > > > > > > > > > > Actual situation: > > > > > > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, > 3.10 > > > > > > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system and > > > > > environment > > > > > > management system) which supports the following python versions: > > 3.7, > > > > > 3.8, > > > > > > 3.9, 3.10 > > > > > > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > > > > > > > > > > > Issues: > > > > > > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. > This > > > > > version > > > > > > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > > > > > > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > > > > > > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years old > > > > already > > > > > > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and ppc64le) > > > > > > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set > > supports > > > > the > > > > > > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 > support > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggestion to solve the issues: > > > > > > * In 1.19 drop python 3.7 support and upgrade miniconda to the > > latest > > > > > > version which opens the door to other platform + python 3.11 > > support > > > > > > > > > > > > Please note python 3.11 support is not initiated/discussed here. > > > > > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > G > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Sergey > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Thanks for all the responses! Based on the suggestions I've created the following jiras and started to work on them: * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33029 * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33030 The reason why I've split them is to separate the concerns and reduce the amount of code in a PR to help reviewers. BR, G On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:57 PM Sergey Nuyanzin wrote: > +1, > Thanks for looking into this. > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:38 AM Gyula Fóra wrote: > > > +1 > > Thanks for looking into this. > > > > Gyula > > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl > .invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as well. > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi < > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped Python 3.6 > > due > > > to > > > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes sense > to > > > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Marton > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi < > > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some > > > improvement > > > > > possibilities. > > > > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > > > > > > > Intention: > > > > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate end-of-life > > > issues > > > > > and keep up with bugfixes > > > > > * start to add python arm64 support > > > > > > > > > > Actual situation: > > > > > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 > > > > > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system and > > > > environment > > > > > management system) which supports the following python versions: > 3.7, > > > > 3.8, > > > > > 3.9, 3.10 > > > > > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > > > > > > > > > Issues: > > > > > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. This > > > > version > > > > > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > > > > > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > > > > > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years old > > > already > > > > > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and ppc64le) > > > > > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set > supports > > > the > > > > > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 support > > > > > > > > > > Suggestion to solve the issues: > > > > > * In 1.19 drop python 3.7 support and upgrade miniconda to the > latest > > > > > version which opens the door to other platform + python 3.11 > support > > > > > > > > > > Please note python 3.11 support is not initiated/discussed here. > > > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > > G > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Sergey >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
+1, Thanks for looking into this. On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:38 AM Gyula Fóra wrote: > +1 > Thanks for looking into this. > > Gyula > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl .invalid> > wrote: > > > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as well. > > > > +1 > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped Python 3.6 > due > > to > > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes sense to > > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > > > > > Best, > > > Marton > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi < > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some > > improvement > > > > possibilities. > > > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > > > > > Intention: > > > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate end-of-life > > issues > > > > and keep up with bugfixes > > > > * start to add python arm64 support > > > > > > > > Actual situation: > > > > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 > > > > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system and > > > environment > > > > management system) which supports the following python versions: 3.7, > > > 3.8, > > > > 3.9, 3.10 > > > > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > > > > > > > Issues: > > > > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. This > > > version > > > > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > > > > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > > > > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years old > > already > > > > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and ppc64le) > > > > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set supports > > the > > > > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 support > > > > > > > > Suggestion to solve the issues: > > > > * In 1.19 drop python 3.7 support and upgrade miniconda to the latest > > > > version which opens the door to other platform + python 3.11 support > > > > > > > > Please note python 3.11 support is not initiated/discussed here. > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > G > > > > > > > > > > -- Best regards, Sergey
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
+1 Thanks for looking into this. Gyula On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:26 AM Matthias Pohl wrote: > Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as well. > > +1 > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi > wrote: > > > Hi Gabor, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped Python 3.6 due > to > > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes sense to > > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > > > +1. > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > > > Best, > > Marton > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some > improvement > > > possibilities. > > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > > > Intention: > > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate end-of-life > issues > > > and keep up with bugfixes > > > * start to add python arm64 support > > > > > > Actual situation: > > > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 > > > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system and > > environment > > > management system) which supports the following python versions: 3.7, > > 3.8, > > > 3.9, 3.10 > > > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > > > > > Issues: > > > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. This > > version > > > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > > > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > > > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years old > already > > > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and ppc64le) > > > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set supports > the > > > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 support > > > > > > Suggestion to solve the issues: > > > * In 1.19 drop python 3.7 support and upgrade miniconda to the latest > > > version which opens the door to other platform + python 3.11 support > > > > > > Please note python 3.11 support is not initiated/discussed here. > > > > > > BR, > > > G > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Thanks Gabor for looking into it. It sounds reasonable to me as well. +1 On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 5:44 PM Márton Balassi wrote: > Hi Gabor, > > Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped Python 3.6 due to > its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes sense to > proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. > > +1. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 > > Best, > Marton > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi > wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some improvement > > possibilities. > > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > > > Intention: > > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate end-of-life issues > > and keep up with bugfixes > > * start to add python arm64 support > > > > Actual situation: > > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 > > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system and > environment > > management system) which supports the following python versions: 3.7, > 3.8, > > 3.9, 3.10 > > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > > > Issues: > > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. This > version > > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years old already > > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and ppc64le) > > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set supports the > > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 support > > > > Suggestion to solve the issues: > > * In 1.19 drop python 3.7 support and upgrade miniconda to the latest > > version which opens the door to other platform + python 3.11 support > > > > Please note python 3.11 support is not initiated/discussed here. > > > > BR, > > G > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop python 3.7 support in 1.19
Hi Gabor, Thanks for bringing this up. Similarly to when we dropped Python 3.6 due to its end of life (and added 3.10) in Flink 1.17 [1,2], it makes sense to proceed to remove 3.7 and add 3.11 instead. +1. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27929 [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/21699 Best, Marton On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:39 AM Gabor Somogyi wrote: > Hi All, > > I've analyzed through part of the pyflink code and found some improvement > possibilities. > I would like to hear voices on the idea. > > Intention: > * upgrade several python related versions to eliminate end-of-life issues > and keep up with bugfixes > * start to add python arm64 support > > Actual situation: > * Flink supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 > * We use miniconda 4.7.10 (python package management system and environment > management system) which supports the following python versions: 3.7, 3.8, > 3.9, 3.10 > * Our python framework is not supporting anything but x86_64 > > Issues: > * Python 3.7.17 is the latest security patch of the 3.7 line. This version > is end-of-life and is no longer supported: > https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3717/ > * Miniconda 4.7.10 is released on 2019-07-29 which is 4 years old already > and not supporting too many architectures (x86_64 and ppc64le) > * The latest miniconda which has real multi-arch feature set supports the > following python versions: 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11 and no 3.7 support > > Suggestion to solve the issues: > * In 1.19 drop python 3.7 support and upgrade miniconda to the latest > version which opens the door to other platform + python 3.11 support > > Please note python 3.11 support is not initiated/discussed here. > > BR, > G >
