Usually we should avoid checking in patches other than bug fix after feature freeze. However, in this particular case, the code base is sort of in an incomplete state - an exposed known-to-change feature - due to missing this patch. Fixing forward seems the best option. Besides that, FLIP-27 has been highly anticipated by many users. So if one patch completes the story, personally speaking I am +1 to backport given the isolated impact and significant benefit of doing that.
Thanks, Jiangjie (Becket) Qin On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:43 PM Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all! > > I want to discuss merging this PR to the 1.11 release branch: > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/12306 > > It contains the new FLIP-126 Watermarks, and per-partition watermarking to > the FLIP-27 sources. In that sense it is partially a new feature after the > feature freeze. Hence this discussion, and not just merging. > > The reasons why I suggest to back-port this to 1.11 are > - It is API breaking. Without this patch, we would release a Source API > and immediately break compatibility in the next release. > - The FLIP-27 feature is experimental, but it should not be useless in > the sense that users have to re-write all implemented sources in the next > release. > - It is a fairly isolated change, does not affect any existing feature > in the system > > Please let me know if you have concerns about this. > > Best, > Stephan > >
