Great -- thanks! I'm going to be out of town for about a week but I'll take a look at this when I'm back.
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 8:46 AM Martijn Visser <mvis...@confluent.io> wrote: > Hi Galen, > > Yes, I'll be more than happy to help with Statefun releases. > > Best regards, > > Martijn > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 2:21 PM Galen Warren <ga...@cvillewarrens.com> > wrote: > >> Thanks. >> >> Martijn, to answer your question, I'd need to do a small amount of work >> to get a PR ready, but not much. Happy to do it if we're deciding to >> restart Statefun releases -- are we? >> >> -- Galen >> >> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 9:47 AM Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai <tzuli...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> > Perhaps he could weigh in on whether the combination of automated >>> tests plus those smoke tests should be sufficient for testing with new >>> Flink versions >>> >>> What we usually did at the bare minimum for new StateFun releases was >>> the following: >>> >>> 1. Build tests (including the smoke tests in the e2e module, which >>> covers important tests like exactly-once verification) >>> 2. Updating the flink-statefun-playground repo and manually running >>> all language examples there. >>> >>> If upgrading Flink versions was the only change in the release, I'd >>> probably say that this is sufficient. >>> >>> Best, >>> Gordon >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 5:25 AM Martijn Visser <martijnvis...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Let me know if you have a PR for a Flink update :) >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 5:52 PM Galen Warren via user < >>>> u...@flink.apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks Martijn. >>>>> >>>>> Personally, I'm already using a local fork of Statefun that is >>>>> compatible with Flink 1.16.x, so I wouldn't have any need for a released >>>>> version compatible with 1.15.x. I'd be happy to do the PRs to modify >>>>> Statefun to work with new versions of Flink as they come along. >>>>> >>>>> As for testing, Statefun does have unit tests and Gordon also sent me >>>>> instructions a while back for how to do some additional smoke tests which >>>>> are pretty straightforward. Perhaps he could weigh in on whether the >>>>> combination of automated tests plus those smoke tests should be sufficient >>>>> for testing with new Flink versions (I believe the answer is yes). >>>>> >>>>> -- Galen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 8:01 AM Martijn Visser < >>>>> martijnvis...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Apologies for the late reply. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm willing to help out with merging requests in Statefun to keep them >>>>>> compatible with new Flink releases and create new releases. I do >>>>>> think that >>>>>> validation of the functionality of these releases depends a lot on >>>>>> those >>>>>> who do these compatibility updates, with PMC members helping out with >>>>>> the >>>>>> formal process. >>>>>> >>>>>> > Why can't the Apache Software Foundation allow community members to >>>>>> bring >>>>>> it up to date? >>>>>> >>>>>> There's nothing preventing anyone from reviewing any of the current >>>>>> PRs or >>>>>> opening new ones. However, none of them are approved [1], so there's >>>>>> also >>>>>> nothing to merge. >>>>>> >>>>>> > I believe that there are people and companies on this mailing list >>>>>> interested in supporting Apache Flink Stateful Functions. >>>>>> >>>>>> If so, then now is the time to show. >>>>>> >>>>>> Would there be a preference to create a release with Galen's merged >>>>>> compatibility update to Flink 1.15.2, or do we want to skip that and >>>>>> go >>>>>> straight to a newer version? >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Martijn >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+review%3Aapproved >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 3:55 PM Marco Villalobos < >>>>>> mvillalo...@kineteque.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> > Why can't the Apache Software Foundation allow community members to >>>>>> bring >>>>>> > it up to date? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > What's the process for that? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I believe that there are people and companies on this mailing list >>>>>> > interested in supporting Apache Flink Stateful Functions. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > You already had two people on this thread express interest. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > At the very least, we could keep the library versions up to date. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > There are only a small list of new features that might be >>>>>> worthwhile: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 1. event time processing >>>>>> > 2. state rest api >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Jun 6, 2023, at 3:06 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > If you were to fork it *and want to redistribute it* then the short >>>>>> > version is that >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 1. you have to adhere to the Apache licensing requirements >>>>>> > 2. you have to make it clear that your fork does not belong to >>>>>> the >>>>>> > Apache Flink project. (Trademarks and all that) >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Neither should be significant hurdles (there should also be plenty >>>>>> of >>>>>> > online resources regarding 1), and if you do this then you can >>>>>> freely share >>>>>> > your fork with others. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I've also pinged Martijn to take a look at this thread. >>>>>> > To my knowledge the project hasn't decided anything yet. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On 27/05/2023 04:05, Galen Warren wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Ok, I get it. No interest. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > If this project is being abandoned, I guess I'll work with my own >>>>>> fork. Is >>>>>> > there anything I should consider here? Can I share it with other >>>>>> people who >>>>>> > use this project? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:50 AM Galen Warren < >>>>>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com> <ga...@cvillewarrens.com> >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Hi Martijn, since you opened this discussion thread, I'm curious >>>>>> what your >>>>>> > thoughts are in light of the responses? Thanks. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 1:21 PM Galen Warren < >>>>>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com> <ga...@cvillewarrens.com> >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I use Apache Flink for stream processing, and StateFun as a hand-off >>>>>> > >>>>>> > point for the rest of the application. >>>>>> > It serves well as a bridge between a Flink Streaming job and >>>>>> > micro-services. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > This is essentially how I use it as well, and I would also be sad >>>>>> to see >>>>>> > it sunsetted. It works well; I don't know that there is a lot of new >>>>>> > development required, but if there are no new Statefun releases, >>>>>> then >>>>>> > Statefun can only be used with older Flink versions. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 10:04 PM Marco Villalobos < >>>>>> mvillalo...@kineteque.com> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I am currently using Stateful Functions in my application. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I use Apache Flink for stream processing, and StateFun as a hand-off >>>>>> > point for the rest of the application. >>>>>> > It serves well as a bridge between a Flink Streaming job and >>>>>> > micro-services. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I would be disappointed if StateFun was sunsetted. Its a good idea. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > If there is anything I can do to help, as a contributor perhaps, >>>>>> please >>>>>> > let me know. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Apr 3, 2023, at 2:02 AM, Martijn Visser < >>>>>> martijnvis...@apache.org> <martijnvis...@apache.org> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Hi everyone, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I want to open a discussion on the status of the Statefun Project >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> > >>>>>> > in Apache Flink. As you might have noticed, there hasn't been much >>>>>> > development over the past months in the Statefun repository [2]. >>>>>> There is >>>>>> > currently a lack of active contributors and committers who are able >>>>>> to help >>>>>> > with the maintenance of the project. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > In order to improve the situation, we need to solve the lack of >>>>>> > >>>>>> > committers and the lack of contributors. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On the lack of committers: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 1. Ideally, there are some of the current Flink committers who have >>>>>> > >>>>>> > the bandwidth and can help with reviewing PRs and merging them. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 2. If that's not an option, it could be a consideration that current >>>>>> > >>>>>> > committers only approve and review PRs, that are approved by those >>>>>> who are >>>>>> > willing to contribute to Statefun and if the CI passes >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On the lack of contributors: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 3. Next to having this discussion on the Dev and User mailing list, >>>>>> we >>>>>> > >>>>>> > can also create a blog with a call for new contributors on the Flink >>>>>> > project website, send out some tweets on the Flink / Statefun >>>>>> twitter >>>>>> > accounts, post messages on Slack etc. In that message, we would >>>>>> inform how >>>>>> > those that are interested in contributing can start and where they >>>>>> could >>>>>> > reach out for more information. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > There's also option 4. where a group of interested people would >>>>>> split >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Statefun from the Flink project and make it a separate top level >>>>>> project >>>>>> > under the Apache Flink umbrella (similar as recently has happened >>>>>> with >>>>>> > Flink Table Store, which has become Apache Paimon). >>>>>> > >>>>>> > If we see no improvements in the coming period, we should consider >>>>>> > >>>>>> > sunsetting Statefun and communicate that clearly to the users. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I'm looking forward to your thoughts. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Best regards, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Martijn >>>>>> > >>>>>> > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-statefun-docs-master/ >>>>>> < >>>>>> > >>>>>> > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-statefun-docs-master/> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun < >>>>>> > >>>>>> > https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>
