+1 to remove Eclipselink on 1.3 or later !

Best,
Prashant Singh

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Doc updates: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2605
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:55 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > EL is officially deprecated since 1.0.0 [1] :)
> >
> > +1 to removing it in 1.3. I'll open a PR to add this to CHANGELOG / docs.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://polaris.apache.org/releases/1.0.0/metastores/#eclipselink-deprecated
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Dmitri.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:51 AM Robert Stupp <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on "officially" deprecating EL in 1.2 + removing it in 1.3
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:53 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I agree with Yufei:
> >> > 1. I would announce EclipseLink will be removed in 1.3
> >> > 2. We do remove it in the 1.3 release
> >> > 3. I don't think we need any tool: moving from EclipseLink to JDBC
> >> > should be smooth and with minimal effort. For one shot effort, not
> >> > sure it's worth to spend time on "migration tool".
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > JB
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 1:41 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > +1 on removing it. Given Polaris’ monthly release cadence, it seems
> >> fine to
> >> > > wait two (remove in 1.3) or three (remove in 1.4) more releases.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
> >> can
> >> > > migrate principals, but doesn't support policies.
> >> > >
> >> > > I’m not sure it’s worth building another type of migration tool for
> >> this
> >> > > use case, we might be better off improving the existing ones.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Yufei
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:10 PM Adam Christian <
> >> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > You are right, Russell. We should make a clear migration path, so
> >> our
> >> > > > EclipseLink users are able to easily transition off on
> EclipseLink.
> >> I know
> >> > > > that this has come up before [1]. Let me investigate a few options
> >> on what
> >> > > > guidance we can give or what tooling we can produce.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1875
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Cheers,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Adam
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:49 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> >> [email protected]>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > We have two migration tools:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > *
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/iceberg-catalog-migrator
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > *
> >> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I'm pretty confident that iceberg-catalog-migrator works well,
> >> but it can
> >> > > > > only migrate tables, not principals.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I never personally used polaris-synchronizer, still it's
> supposed
> >> to
> >> > > > > migrate all Polaris data, including principals.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Cheers,
> >> > > > > Dmitri.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:13 PM Russell Spitzer <
> >> > > > [email protected]
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > +1 I think removing EclipseLink should happen soon now that we
> >> have 2
> >> > > > > > releases with it deprecated. I have
> >> > > > > > looked too deeply into this but do we have a migration plan
> for
> >> users
> >> > > > > > already on EclipseLink to get over to the
> >> > > > > > JDBC Impl?
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 12:53 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> >> [email protected]
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this issue up, Adam!
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I support removing EclipseLink code immediately.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > My rationale:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > * Due to EclipseLink deprecation, non-trivial new features
> >> are not
> >> > > > > > > necessarily implemented there [1]
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > * Any new bugs reported for EclipseLink are not likely to
> get
> >> > > > attention
> >> > > > > > > because this backend is in decline.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > * Users had better migrate to a supported backend earlier.
> If
> >> > > > migration
> >> > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > deferred, it will likely mean that any issues related to
> >> migration
> >> > > > will
> >> > > > > > > take even longer to be found.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > * Polaris 1.1.0 still has EclipseLink, which offers users a
> >> supported
> >> > > > > > > version where critical issues could still be fixed, if they
> >> are
> >> > > > found.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > * Having EclipseLink in the codebase adds overhead for new
> >> features
> >> > > > > that
> >> > > > > > > touch Persistence.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > [1]
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2197/files#diff-59a870c7af1578200236f22d35fd2eb75dc2a1e73e51218464eb7ba089217da7R759
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Cheers,
> >> > > > > > > Dmitri.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:27 PM Adam Christian <
> >> > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Howdy Polaris Community!
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > I was going through our open bugs and I noticed that there
> >> are
> >> > > > > around 5
> >> > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > 10 bugs related to EclipseLink persistence. I was
> wondering
> >> when we
> >> > > > > > > > believe a good time to remove EclipseLink would be.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Personally, I think we could probably start doing it now
> >> since it's
> >> > > > > > been
> >> > > > > > > > deprecated since 1.0.0 and we have a clear alternative. I
> >> believe
> >> > > > > there
> >> > > > > > > are
> >> > > > > > > > several pros for our users such as streamlined
> >> documentation and
> >> > > > > > benefits
> >> > > > > > > > to the contributors such as less issues, dependencies, and
> >> modules.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > How do y'all feel about this?
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > If we are aligned, I can create the issue and start
> working
> >> on it.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Cheers,
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Adam
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >>
> >
>

Reply via email to