[jira] [Created] (FLINK-38389) Add .show(), .head() and .tail() method to PyFlink Table API

Zander Matheson created FLINK-38389: --- Summary: Add .show(), .head() and .tail() method to PyFlink Table API Key: FLINK-38389 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-38389 Project: Flink

[jira] [Created] (FLINK-38388) FLIP-541 Umbrella Issue

Zander Matheson created FLINK-38388: --- Summary: FLIP-541 Umbrella Issue Key: FLINK-38388 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-38388 Project: Flink Issue Type: New Feature

[jira] [Created] (FLINK-38374) Add Artifact keyword as an option to create function syntax

Zander Matheson created FLINK-38374: --- Summary: Add Artifact keyword as an option to create function syntax Key: FLINK-38374 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-38374 Project: Flink

[DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Make JAR keyword optional in CREATE FUNCTION's USING clause

Hi Dev! I would like to start a discussion on a new Flink Improvement Proposal, FLIP-XXX: Make JAR keyword optional in CREATE FUNCTION's USING clause. You can find the full proposal in the google doc [1

[RESULT][VOTE] FLIP-541 Making PyFlink more Pythonic (Phase-1)

Hi Dev! The Voting window has passed and I am happy to announce the proposal (FLIP-541 Making PyFlink more Pythonic (Phase-1)[1]) has been accepted! The vote passed with the required binding votes (5 binding & 10 total)[2]. here is a list of those that voted for the proposal. Dian Fu (binding) Sh

Re: [VOTE] FLIP-541 Making PyFlink more Pythonic (Phase-1)

gt; Cheers, > > Ramin > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 7:12 PM Zander Matheson > wrote: > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > The discussion for FLIP-541, "Making PyFlink more Pythonic (Phase-1)" has > > concluded, and I would like to call a vote to accept t

[VOTE] FLIP-541 Making PyFlink more Pythonic (Phase-1)

Hi Everyone, The discussion for FLIP-541, "Making PyFlink more Pythonic (Phase-1)" has concluded, and I would like to call a vote to accept the proposal. You can find the full proposal here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=378473217 The discussion thread can be

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Improving PyFlink - The Zen of Flink

sed > > separately and those that don't could be made into issues and tracked > that > > way? I am open to suggestions and this is my first FLIP so I don't know > the > > best path forward :). > > +1 to this approach. > > > I will add you to the doc

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Improving PyFlink - The Zen of Flink

On the subject of Beam. I don't think this is a requirement for this initiative, but ideally, long term, it would be nice to not have to rely on Beam *where possible*, but I do understand the size of that effort is quite large and we could move it out of this FLIP. The current work item was really

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Improving PyFlink - The Zen of Flink

Thanks Dian Fu, On 1) This is more in reference to how if we modify things like the builder pattern, we could end up changing certain configuration patterns. I will reframe this to say - Currently there are no expected interfaces that will be removed, but as the work evolves there may be some requ