Hi,

IMO we should not make a release just for the sake of the release. :-)

My main point if there is demand for an Apache labeled Flink HTTP connector
release for the 1.x line that should be solely for 1.20 at this point.

For now I think option 3 (compile and release based on Flink 2.2) would be the
most straightforward way for now. Then we can do a Java 8 port if it will be
necessary in the future and do a release for that.

WDYT?

Best,
Ferenc



On Saturday, April 4th, 2026 at 17:42, David Radley <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> 
> Hi David,
> You make a fair point. I suggest it is up to the community to decide. Are 
> there 3 PMC members who would vote for a 1.20 release? I would like to get 
> feedback from anyone who is likely to adopt a Flink 1.20 version of this 
> connector, given that a Flink 2.2 will be released.
> 
> By copy:  Ferenc you mentioned that if we do a 1.20 connector then we should 
> use JDK 8 [1] . Do you have an opinion as to whether we should ship this 
> connector at Flink 1.20?
> By copy Robert and Martijn: WDYT?
> 
> Hi Pedro,
> Thank you for your enthusiasm and eagerness to contribute this. I would hold 
> off doing too much work until we know we can ship it - i.e. we will get 3 PMC 
> votes.
> 
> In the meantime I will wait for [1] to be reviewed and merged and proceed 
> with a Flink 2.2. java 11 version of this.
> 
> Kind regards, David.
> 
> [1] 
> https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-http/pull/36#issuecomment-4119083813
> [2]  https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-http/pull/38
> 
> From: David Anderson <[email protected]>
> Date: Friday, 3 April 2026 at 23:23
> To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: HTTP connector
> 
> What will it mean if we port the HTTP connector to Java 8? Is the idea that
> the community will then support two versions of this connector until Flink
> 1.20 is no longer relevant, or will the Java 8 port replace the existing
> Java 11 implementation going forward?
> 
> I wonder if this is truly worthwhile. Is there enough interest to justify
> this?
> 
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 7:38 AM Pedro Mázala <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Hey there, David! I can take care of Java8 porting. I need support with
> > reviews and pointers if necessary.
> >
> > Can we collaborate on it? I take care of the PRs and rely on your reviews.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for the work on this connector.
> >
> >
> >
> > Att,
> > Pedro Mázala
> > Be awesome
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 at 11:06, David Radley <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > > The Flink HTTP connector [1]  was ported from a GetInData connector [2].
> > > This connector is built with JAVA 11. It uses the java 11 package
> > > java.net.http and has 86 instances of var. I put up a release candidate
> > for
> > > a version of this supporting Flink 1.20 [3]. I see that Red Hat ends full
> > > support in November 30 2026 [4].
> > >
> > > I was planning to release a v1 of this connector compatible with Flink
> > > 1.20 and a version 2 compatible with Flink 2.2. Though the current
> > > connector works with Flink 2.2.
> > >
> > > A connector shipped with Flink 1.20 support should be built at java 1.8,
> > > the lowest level of Java. Unfortunately, our connectors is built and
> > relies
> > > on java 11.
> > >
> > > I see the following options:
> > >
> > >   1.
> > > Ship as is, which is java 11 target built against Flink 1.20. This would
> > > with a java 11 Flink 1.20 and Flink 2.2. We would document that we will
> > > support Flink 2.2 but would work with 1.20 (built with Java 11).
> > >   2.
> > > Ship a 1.20 compatible version with java 8 with Flink 1.20 dependencies
> > >   3.
> > > Ship a Flink 2.2 compatible version with Flink 2.2. dependencies.
> > >
> > > Option 1 would seem most pragmatic, it provides some Flink 1.20 support.
> > > Option 3 would be the clean way to ship with Flink 2.2, but we would have
> > > no Flink 1.20 support. I am not sure what the appetite for option 2 is.
> > >
> > >  Please let me know your thoughts?  My requirements are met by 1 or 3 and
> > > I plan to implement the one we agree on.
> > >
> > > Kind regards, David.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-http
> > > [2] https://github.com/getindata/flink-http-connector
> > > [3]
> > > https://lists.apache.org/[email protected]:lte=1M:radley%20vote
> > > [4]
> > >
> > https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013#:~:text=RHEL%207%2C%208%20or%209%20must%20be,9%20is%20usable%20with%20any%20Java%20applications
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Unless otherwise stated above:
> > >
> > > IBM United Kingdom Limited
> > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
> > > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road,
> > > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN
> > >
> >
> 
> Unless otherwise stated above:
> 
> IBM United Kingdom Limited
> Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
> Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, 
> Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN
>

Reply via email to