Thanks Ismael and Robert for your thoughts on this. I’m going to check the parity and see if we need to do any changes on this.
PS: Sorry, I screwed up the subject of this thread (“v2" instead of "v1"), it definitively has to be “Deprecation of AWS SDK v1 IO connectors” (thanks to Ismael for pointing this out). > On 16 Sep 2020, at 02:19, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> wrote: > > Thanks for clarifying the state of things. +1 to deprecating once we have > parity. If the v2 ones are better, perhaps a blog post would be a good way to > advertise (and document) their existence and advantages too. > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 2:15 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com>> wrote: > The reason why most people are using AWSv1 IOs is probably because they are > in Beam since 2017 instead of just added in the last year which is the case of > the AWSv2 ones. > > Alexey mentions that maintaining both versions is becoming painful and I would > like to expand on that because we have now duplicated work for new features, > for > example someone contributing some small improvement does it in one of the two > versions and we try to encourage them to do it in both and general confusion > and > lots of extra work is going into keeping them aligned. And for more complex > IOs > like Kinesis this might prove harder in the future. > > Notice that the migration path is incremental because users can have both > Amazon > SDKs in the same classpath without conflicts. And Alexey's proposal is about > deprecating AWSv1 IOs to reduce the maintenance burden, not removing them from > the codebase. This could help to raise awareness about the AWSv2 IOs so users > migrate and diminish the extra overhead for contributors and maintainers. > > One minor comment to the proposal is that if we proceed with this plan we > should > deprecate a v1 IO ONLY when we have full feature parity in the v2 version. > I think we don't have a replacement for AWSv1 S3 IO so that one should not be > deprecated. > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 6:07 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com > <mailto:rober...@google.com>> wrote: > > > > The 10x-100x ratio looks like an answer right there about (non-)suitability > > for deprecation. The new question would be *why* people are using the v1 > > APIs. Is it because it was the original, or that it's been around longer, > > or it has more features? > >
