[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-723704072 @tillrohrmann Sorry for breaking the master. And thanks for the quick fix. I should have run the CI tests again after rebasing on the master even if there is no conflicts...

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-723590220 Merged to master. 80c040fcf3118a52053ffcd00ca4e063e6f52c97 This is an automated message from the Apache

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-723551306 @flinkbot run azure This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message,

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-723516469 @flinkbot run azure This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message,

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-723460867 @StephanEwen I think the complexity mostly comes from the consecutive `resetToCheckpoint()` calls. Imagine the following sequence. 1. The

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-723347149 @StephanEwen Thanks for the review and suggestions. I agree the current logic is a little complicated. I am slightly in favor of the approach (b) because it is a more

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-717837286 @StephanEwen I am trying to address the blocking close() method issue. However, it is a little more complicated than I thought. I want to align some design principle with you

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-717266246 Hi @StephanEwen , thanks for the comments. Re: the Scala versioning in the test-jar of `flink-connector-base`. Good catch! Having a separate module sounds a good

[GitHub] [flink] becketqin commented on pull request #13574: [FLINK-18323] Add a Kafka source implementation based on FLIP-27.

becketqin commented on pull request #13574: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13574#issuecomment-706297553 @StephanEwen @pnowojski @aljoscha Would you have time to take a look at the Kafka Source patch? Thanks! This