lvyanquan commented on PR #4294:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink-cdc/pull/4294#issuecomment-4064799114

   > 1 question: I think cutting a new CDC major version would enable us to 
clear out a lot of code and compatibility complexity, and even JDK8. WDYT?
   
   Hi, ferenc. Thank you for your suggestion.
   
   Maintaining two separate branches (major versions)—one for `Flink 1.x` (JDK 
8) and another for `Flink 2.x` (JDK 11 or 17)—would result in cleaner code, but 
it would complicate code merging (since changes unrelated to the Flink version 
would need to be merged into both branches) and make version releases more 
difficult.
   
   I think the key issue is whether we will have many new features that depend 
on `Flink 2.x` APIs. Based on current feedback from the community, users 
primarily want a CDC connector that works with `Flink 2.x`, and there hasn’t 
been much demand yet for adapting to the new connector capabilities introduced 
in `Flink 2.x`. As a result, a new `CDC 4.0 `branch might not differ 
significantly in functionality from `CDC 3.x`. In the current PR, we’ve 
introduced an Adapter module to provide compatibility with both `Flink 1.x` and 
`Flink 2.x` for existing code, requiring minimal changes to existing 
modules—sufficient to meet the community’s needs.
   
   I prefer to wait until we either adopt `Flink 2.x` as our primary dependency 
version or have a clear need to leverage new features introduced in `Flink 
2.x`—requiring substantial changes to the adapter layer or even causing 
complete incompatibility—before switching to a major `CDC 4.x` release. In such 
a version, we could also introduce significant changes like upgrading the 
Debezium version. This approach would make it easier for users to understand 
the necessity of introducing a new major version.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to