+1 Happy to remove this On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 3:00 AM Christopher Lambert <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello everyone, > since there seems to be agreement on the removal, I've allowed myself to > post a PR for it here: > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2963 > Please take a look. > Thanks, Christopher > > On 30.10.25 20:16, Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Now that 1.2.0 has officially been released, I'd like to re-open the > > discussion about EclipseLink removal and propose to remove it from `main` > > now (impacts the upcoming 1.3.0 or 2.0.0 release). > > > > Any concerns? > > > > Thanks, > > Dmitri. > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:41 AM Prashant Singh > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> +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 > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >
