Thanks Chanhae for driving this. Please let me clarify the tags:
IIUC, > Primary releases: > - jdbc-3.5.0 (for Flink 1.20.x) > - jdbc-5.0.0 (for Flink 2.1.x) > - jdbc-6.0.0 (for Flink 2.2.x) > > Reserve tags (in case additional patch releases are needed): > - jdbc-5.1.0 (for Flink 2.1.x) > - jdbc-6.1.0 (for Flink 2.2.x) may be adjusted as following: Primary releases: - jdbc-5.0.0 (for Flink 2.1.x) - jdbc-6.0.0 (for Flink 2.2.x) Reserve tags (in case additional patch releases are needed): - jdbc-5.1.0 (for Flink 2.1.x) - jdbc-6.1.0 (for Flink 2.2.x) - jdbc-3.5.0 (for Flink 1.20.x) Because: - The 'jdbc-3.4.0' tag was created already for managing tickets. - The voting for Flink 2.3.0 has passed, we propose including *JDBC Connector 6.0 (for Flink 2.2.x)* in this release cycle as well. BTW, we currently have four volunteers supporting this release, so manpower should be sufficient. - Yuepeng Pan - Sumin Joo - Chanhae Oh - Chanbin O Looking forward your help and thoughts. Best regards, Yuepeng Pan Chanhae Oh <[email protected]> 于2026年6月18日周四 18:18写道： > > Hi devs, > > Following up on this discussion, as we are now moving forward with the > release plan, we would like to request the creation of the following Jira > version tags for ticket management: > > Primary releases: > - jdbc-3.5.0 (for Flink 1.20.x) > - jdbc-5.0.0 (for Flink 2.1.x) > - jdbc-6.0.0 (for Flink 2.2.x) > > Reserve tags (in case additional patch releases are needed): > - jdbc-5.1.0 (for Flink 2.1.x) > - jdbc-6.1.0 (for Flink 2.2.x) > > Could a PMC member or someone with the necessary Jira administrator > permissions help create these version tags? > > Thank you in advance for your support! > > Best regards, > ChanHae Oh > > > 2026. 6. 16. 오전 11:00, 오찬빈 <[email protected]> 작성: > > > > Hi Yuepeng and Devs, > > > > Thanks Yuepeng for driving this discussion and volunteering as the RM. > > > > I agree with Rui and Chanhae's points regarding the versioning strategy. > > Referring to how Kafka or other external connectors manage their versions > > (e.g., {Connector Version}-{Flink Version} or clear cross-reference) > would > > definitely improve user clarity in the long run. > > > > For the upcoming release, continuing with the existing sequential scheme > to > > avoid disruption while aligning on a unified convention for future > roadmap > > items seems like a pragmatic approach. > > > > Also, I agree that dropping support for Flink 2.0 makes sense, as > focusing > >> on the Flink 1.20 (LTS) and the latest 2.x lines will provide more > value to > >> the community. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> ChanBin Oh > >> > >> 2026년 6월 16일 (화) 오전 9:47, Chanhae Oh <[email protected]>님이 작성: > >> > >> > >> 나의 iPhone에서 보냄 > >> > >> 전달된 메시지 시작: > >> > >> *보낸 사람:* Yuepeng Pan <[email protected]> > >> *날짜:* 2026년 6월 15일 오후 11시 2분 23초 GMT+9 > >> *받는 사람:* [email protected] > >> *제목:* *Re: [DISCUSS] Release Plan for the Next Group of Flink JDBC > >> Connector Versions* > >> *답장 받을 사람:* [email protected] > >> > >> Thanks Chanhae, Sumin for the comments, Rui for the clarification. > >> > >> After reviewing the Kafka connector release lineage and current status, > >> IIUC, we'd plan to roll out *v5.0 (targeting Flink 2.1)* and *v3.4 > >> (targeting Flink 1.20)*. > >> > >> Welcome *Chanhae* and *Sumin* to this release cycle! > >> > >> Looking forward to more feedback! > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Yuepeng Pan > >> > >> Rui Fan <[email protected]> 于2026年6月15日周一 18:26写道： > >> > >> Thanks Yuepeng for driving the release! > >> > >> > >> About Versioning Strategy, we could refer to the release of Kafka or > other > >> > >> connectors. > >> > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Rui > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 12:26 PM 주수민 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hi Yuepeng, > >> > >> > >> Thank you for initiating this discussion. > >> > >> > >> Personally, I agree with Chanhae's thoughts on the versioning strategy > >> > >> and > >> > >> focusing on the Flink 1.20 (LTS) / 2.x lines. > >> > >> I would love to participate in this release effort and help out if my > >> > >> contribution is welcome. > >> > >> > >> Thank you again for driving this forward! > >> > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Sumin Joo > >> > >> > >> 2026년 6월 9일 (화) 오전 11:56, Chanhae Oh <[email protected]>님이 작성: > >> > >> > >> Hi Yuepeng, > >> > >> > >> Thank you for starting this discussion. I'd like to share my thoughts > >> > >> on > >> > >> the topics you raised. > >> > >> > >> --- > >> > >> > >> *1. Versioning Strategy for Flink 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3* > >> > >> > >> A versioning scheme such as {Connector Version}-{Flink Version}, > >> > >> similar > >> > >> to > >> > >> what users often see in Maven repositories, would provide better > >> > >> clarity > >> > >> and consistency. > >> > >> However, I think it would be even more beneficial if such a convention > >> > >> were > >> > >> adopted consistently across other connector repositories as well. > >> > >> For the next release, I would prefer to continue with the existing > >> > >> sequential versioning scheme to minimize disruption. > >> > >> At the same time, it may be worth discussing a coordinated naming > >> > >> convention across connector repositories for future releases. > >> > >> > >> > >> *2. Support Policy for Flink 2.0* > >> > >> > >> Personally, I don't think continued support for Flink 2.0 is > >> > >> particularly > >> > >> necessary. > >> > >> Many improvements and new features have already been introduced in > >> > >> later > >> > >> Flink releases. > >> > >> Additionally, when comparing the user bases of Flink 1.20 and Flink > >> > >> 2.0, > >> > >> I > >> > >> would expect the Flink 1.20 (LTS) line to have broader adoption and > >> > >> remain > >> > >> more important for long-term support. > >> > >> > >> --- > >> > >> > >> Also, if there is anything I can help with for the upcoming release > >> > >> effort, > >> > >> I would be happy to contribute and support the work as much as I can. > >> > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Chanhae Oh > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 1:24 AM Yuepeng Pan <[email protected]> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hi Devs, > >> > >> > >> Following the release of v3.3 (for Flink 1.20.x) and v4.0 (for Flink > >> > >> 2.0.x), the Flink JDBC Connector has not had a new release for quite > >> > >> some > >> > >> time. During this period, Flink itself has released versions 2.1, > >> > >> 2.2, > >> > >> and > >> > >> 2.3 (upcoming). > >> > >> > >> I would like to initiate a discussion regarding the next group of > >> > >> Flink > >> > >> JDBC Connector releases. > >> > >> > >> 0. I’d like to hear more thoughts on the next release > >> > >> > >> > >> Based on a quick review of the current repository status, I have > >> > >> identified > >> > >> several topics that need to be discussed before the release plan: > >> > >> > >> > >> 1. Versioning Strategy for Flink 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 > >> > >> Do we need a new branching/versioning scheme to maintain patches and > >> > >> updates for these specific Flink versions? > >> > >> > >> Option A: Semantic versioning tied to Flink (e.g., v2.1-1.0) > >> > >> Format: {Flink_Version}-{Connector_Version}(e.g., 2.1-1.0). > >> > >> Pros: It is immediately clear which Flink version the connector > >> > >> supports. > >> > >> Cons: This deviates from our historical naming convention and might > >> > >> cause > >> > >> confusion for users and developers. > >> > >> > >> Option B: Continuing sequential versioning (e.g., v5.x, v6.x) > >> > >> Mapping: v5.xfor Flink 2.1, v6.xfor Flink 2.2, etc. > >> > >> Pros: Consistent with the previous naming scheme (v3.x, v4.x). > >> > >> Cons: It is less intuitive to map connector versions to Flink > >> > >> versions. > >> > >> > >> > >> Note on LTS: Regardless of the outcome for the 2.x series, continuing > >> > >> to > >> > >> use the v3.xseries for the long-term support (LTS) Flink 1.20.x line > >> > >> may > >> > >> remain a solid choice. > >> > >> > >> > >> 2. Support Policy for Flink 2.0 > >> > >> Do we still need to support the JDBC connector for Flink 2.0? Since > >> > >> the > >> > >> latest Flink version is 2.3 (upcoming), Flink 2.0 is now three minor > >> > >> versions behind. > >> > >> > >> > >> BTW, I'd be willing to volunteer as a Release Manager (RM) for the > >> > >> next > >> > >> release of Flink JDBC connector. > >> > >> I also look forward to collaborating with other interested > >> > >> contributors > >> > >> to > >> > >> drive this effort forward. > >> > >> > >> > >> Thank you very much. And looking forward to your feedback. > >> > >> > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Yuepeng Pan > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >
