Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze and deprecation work for 2.0

[Matthias Pohl]

A side effect of the amount of deprecation FLIPs is that it takes up quite
a bit of time to verify them (if you want the community to do a proper
check). Individual FLIPs might not be that big. And of course, one could
argue that we can distribute the work to multiple people as a community
effort. But it puts pressure on the community to focus on that topic and
might remove capacity from the community to do release testing for 1.18 or
fixing bugs that pop up.

I see a risk in lowering the quality of the 1.18 release and the
deprecation work (where we then might have to do another round if we missed
something) with no additional value because deprecation work still needs to
be done in 1.19.

In this sense, pushing non-functional changes to master might be ok
codewise - but they might come with other implications.

Matthias

On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 9:53 AM Qingsheng Ren  wrote:

> Hi Xintong,
>
> It's fine to me to accept deprecations that only add annotations and
> JavaDocs. We'll make a formal announcement later about 1.18 feature freeze
> and plans on x-team testing, and please let us know (make a reply in that
> thread) before you wanna do the deprecation action.
>
> Best,
> Qingsheng
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 1:06 PM Xintong Song 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the response, Qingsheng.
> >
> > I'm fine with not allowing new features after the 1.18 freeze.
> >
> > Just want to double-check, how about the FLIPs that purely mark things as
> > `@Deprecated` without adding anything new? Do we agree to treat them as
> > "not new features"?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Xintong
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:08 PM Qingsheng Ren  wrote:
> >
> > > (Sorry for resending this. I forgot to cc the dev mailing list)
> > >
> > > Hi Matthias and Xintong,
> > >
> > > Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release sync
> > on
> > > Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18 and
> > will
> > > not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We don't
> see
> > > benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks squeezing
> > these
> > > deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of them
> have
> > > not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the overhead of
> > > evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.
> > >
> > > What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the
> > beginning
> > > of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0 working items
> are
> > > finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:06 PM Qingsheng Ren 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Matthias and Xintong,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release
> sync
> > >> on Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18
> > and
> > >> will not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We
> > don't
> > >> see benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks
> squeezing
> > >> these deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of
> > them
> > >> have not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the
> > overhead of
> > >> evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.
> > >>
> > >> What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the
> > >> beginning of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0
> > working
> > >> items are finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 5:28 PM Xintong Song 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Good question. CC-ed the release managers.
> > >>>
> > >>> My 2-cents:
> > >>> I think the purpose of feature freeze is to prevent new feature /
> > >>> improvement changes from destabilizing the code base, in order to
> get a
> > >>> stable and verified release. Based on this, I'd suggest:
> > >>> - Considering FLIPs that purely mark an API as deprecated and do not
> > >>> introduce anything new as "not a new feature", because that can
> hardly
> > >>> cause any trouble.
> > >>> - Considering FLIPs that introduce new / replacing APIs in addition
> to
> > >>> deprecating old ones as "new features or improvements". Merging codes
> > for
> > >>> such FLIPs after the feature freeze should be carefully evaluated and
> > >>> require permissions from the release managers.
> > >>> - Further extending the feature freeze might also be an option, but I
> > >>> personally don't think it's necessary to block the release testing.
> > Most of
> > >>> the recent API deprecation FLIPs require only minor changes that IHMO
> > can
> > >>> barely affect the stability of the codebase.
> > >>>
> > >>> But this should be the release managers' call. Looking forward to
> your
> > >>> opinions.
> > >>>
> > >>> Best,
> > >>>
> > >>> Xintong
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze and deprecation work for 2.0

[Qingsheng Ren]

Hi Xintong,

It's fine to me to accept deprecations that only add annotations and
JavaDocs. We'll make a formal announcement later about 1.18 feature freeze
and plans on x-team testing, and please let us know (make a reply in that
thread) before you wanna do the deprecation action.

Best,
Qingsheng

On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 1:06 PM Xintong Song  wrote:

> Thanks for the response, Qingsheng.
>
> I'm fine with not allowing new features after the 1.18 freeze.
>
> Just want to double-check, how about the FLIPs that purely mark things as
> `@Deprecated` without adding anything new? Do we agree to treat them as
> "not new features"?
>
> Best,
>
> Xintong
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:08 PM Qingsheng Ren  wrote:
>
> > (Sorry for resending this. I forgot to cc the dev mailing list)
> >
> > Hi Matthias and Xintong,
> >
> > Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release sync
> on
> > Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18 and
> will
> > not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We don't see
> > benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks squeezing
> these
> > deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of them have
> > not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the overhead of
> > evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.
> >
> > What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the
> beginning
> > of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0 working items are
> > finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
> >
> > Best,
> > Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:06 PM Qingsheng Ren  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Matthias and Xintong,
> >>
> >> Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release sync
> >> on Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18
> and
> >> will not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We
> don't
> >> see benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks squeezing
> >> these deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of
> them
> >> have not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the
> overhead of
> >> evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.
> >>
> >> What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the
> >> beginning of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0
> working
> >> items are finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 5:28 PM Xintong Song 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Good question. CC-ed the release managers.
> >>>
> >>> My 2-cents:
> >>> I think the purpose of feature freeze is to prevent new feature /
> >>> improvement changes from destabilizing the code base, in order to get a
> >>> stable and verified release. Based on this, I'd suggest:
> >>> - Considering FLIPs that purely mark an API as deprecated and do not
> >>> introduce anything new as "not a new feature", because that can hardly
> >>> cause any trouble.
> >>> - Considering FLIPs that introduce new / replacing APIs in addition to
> >>> deprecating old ones as "new features or improvements". Merging codes
> for
> >>> such FLIPs after the feature freeze should be carefully evaluated and
> >>> require permissions from the release managers.
> >>> - Further extending the feature freeze might also be an option, but I
> >>> personally don't think it's necessary to block the release testing.
> Most of
> >>> the recent API deprecation FLIPs require only minor changes that IHMO
> can
> >>> barely affect the stability of the codebase.
> >>>
> >>> But this should be the release managers' call. Looking forward to your
> >>> opinions.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>>
> >>> Xintong
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 4:25 PM Matthias Pohl
> >>>  wrote:
> >>>
>  The feature freeze was postponed to July 24 (end of this week in
>  Europe/early morning Monday in East Asia) in [1]. What's the 1.18
>  release
>  managers' take on all the FLIPs that were recently started and require
>  some
>  deprecation work (which ideally should go into 1.18)? How does that
> work
>  with the feature freeze happening by the end of this week?
> 
>  - Do we plan to extend the feature freeze to allow deprecation changes
>  to
>  go in?
>  - Do we consider depreciation work to be "not a new feature" which
> means
>  that we're ok with merging them after the feature freeze?
> 
>  Best,
>  Matthias
> 
>  [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9fck1m5llrnv5gx1od05tzx84oy0b4z0
> 
> >>>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze and deprecation work for 2.0

[Xintong Song]

Thanks for the response, Qingsheng.

I'm fine with not allowing new features after the 1.18 freeze.

Just want to double-check, how about the FLIPs that purely mark things as
`@Deprecated` without adding anything new? Do we agree to treat them as
"not new features"?

Best,

Xintong



On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:08 PM Qingsheng Ren  wrote:

> (Sorry for resending this. I forgot to cc the dev mailing list)
>
> Hi Matthias and Xintong,
>
> Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release sync on
> Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18 and will
> not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We don't see
> benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks squeezing these
> deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of them have
> not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the overhead of
> evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.
>
> What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the beginning
> of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0 working items are
> finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
>
> Best,
> Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:06 PM Qingsheng Ren  wrote:
>
>> Hi Matthias and Xintong,
>>
>> Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release sync
>> on Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18 and
>> will not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We don't
>> see benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks squeezing
>> these deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of them
>> have not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the overhead of
>> evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.
>>
>> What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the
>> beginning of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0 working
>> items are finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
>>
>> Best,
>> Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 5:28 PM Xintong Song 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Good question. CC-ed the release managers.
>>>
>>> My 2-cents:
>>> I think the purpose of feature freeze is to prevent new feature /
>>> improvement changes from destabilizing the code base, in order to get a
>>> stable and verified release. Based on this, I'd suggest:
>>> - Considering FLIPs that purely mark an API as deprecated and do not
>>> introduce anything new as "not a new feature", because that can hardly
>>> cause any trouble.
>>> - Considering FLIPs that introduce new / replacing APIs in addition to
>>> deprecating old ones as "new features or improvements". Merging codes for
>>> such FLIPs after the feature freeze should be carefully evaluated and
>>> require permissions from the release managers.
>>> - Further extending the feature freeze might also be an option, but I
>>> personally don't think it's necessary to block the release testing. Most of
>>> the recent API deprecation FLIPs require only minor changes that IHMO can
>>> barely affect the stability of the codebase.
>>>
>>> But this should be the release managers' call. Looking forward to your
>>> opinions.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Xintong
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 4:25 PM Matthias Pohl
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 The feature freeze was postponed to July 24 (end of this week in
 Europe/early morning Monday in East Asia) in [1]. What's the 1.18
 release
 managers' take on all the FLIPs that were recently started and require
 some
 deprecation work (which ideally should go into 1.18)? How does that work
 with the feature freeze happening by the end of this week?

 - Do we plan to extend the feature freeze to allow deprecation changes
 to
 go in?
 - Do we consider depreciation work to be "not a new feature" which means
 that we're ok with merging them after the feature freeze?

 Best,
 Matthias

 [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9fck1m5llrnv5gx1od05tzx84oy0b4z0

>>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze and deprecation work for 2.0

[Qingsheng Ren]

(Sorry for resending this. I forgot to cc the dev mailing list)

Hi Matthias and Xintong,

Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release sync on
Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18 and will
not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We don't see
benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks squeezing these
deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of them have
not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the overhead of
evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.

What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the beginning
of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0 working items are
finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?

Best,
Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey

On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:06 PM Qingsheng Ren  wrote:

> Hi Matthias and Xintong,
>
> Thanks for raising the question! We brought it to the 1.18 release sync on
> Jul 26th, and we decided to stick to the original schedule of 1.18 and will
> not accept new features, including those deprecation works. We don't see
> benefits to 2.0 clearly about giving another several weeks squeezing these
> deprecations into 1.18. I checked the latest FLIPs and most of them have
> not been voted on yet, so we are a bit concerned about the overhead of
> evaluating these cases and potentially delaying the release of 1.18.
>
> What about we have a better, clearer plan on deprecations at the
> beginning of the next release cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0 working
> items are finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
>
> Best,
> Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 5:28 PM Xintong Song 
> wrote:
>
>> Good question. CC-ed the release managers.
>>
>> My 2-cents:
>> I think the purpose of feature freeze is to prevent new feature /
>> improvement changes from destabilizing the code base, in order to get a
>> stable and verified release. Based on this, I'd suggest:
>> - Considering FLIPs that purely mark an API as deprecated and do not
>> introduce anything new as "not a new feature", because that can hardly
>> cause any trouble.
>> - Considering FLIPs that introduce new / replacing APIs in addition to
>> deprecating old ones as "new features or improvements". Merging codes for
>> such FLIPs after the feature freeze should be carefully evaluated and
>> require permissions from the release managers.
>> - Further extending the feature freeze might also be an option, but I
>> personally don't think it's necessary to block the release testing. Most of
>> the recent API deprecation FLIPs require only minor changes that IHMO can
>> barely affect the stability of the codebase.
>>
>> But this should be the release managers' call. Looking forward to your
>> opinions.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Xintong
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 4:25 PM Matthias Pohl
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> The feature freeze was postponed to July 24 (end of this week in
>>> Europe/early morning Monday in East Asia) in [1]. What's the 1.18 release
>>> managers' take on all the FLIPs that were recently started and require
>>> some
>>> deprecation work (which ideally should go into 1.18)? How does that work
>>> with the feature freeze happening by the end of this week?
>>>
>>> - Do we plan to extend the feature freeze to allow deprecation changes to
>>> go in?
>>> - Do we consider depreciation work to be "not a new feature" which means
>>> that we're ok with merging them after the feature freeze?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9fck1m5llrnv5gx1od05tzx84oy0b4z0
>>>
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze and deprecation work for 2.0

[Xintong Song]

Good question. CC-ed the release managers.

My 2-cents:
I think the purpose of feature freeze is to prevent new feature /
improvement changes from destabilizing the code base, in order to get a
stable and verified release. Based on this, I'd suggest:
- Considering FLIPs that purely mark an API as deprecated and do not
introduce anything new as "not a new feature", because that can hardly
cause any trouble.
- Considering FLIPs that introduce new / replacing APIs in addition to
deprecating old ones as "new features or improvements". Merging codes for
such FLIPs after the feature freeze should be carefully evaluated and
require permissions from the release managers.
- Further extending the feature freeze might also be an option, but I
personally don't think it's necessary to block the release testing. Most of
the recent API deprecation FLIPs require only minor changes that IHMO can
barely affect the stability of the codebase.

But this should be the release managers' call. Looking forward to your
opinions.

Best,

Xintong



On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 4:25 PM Matthias Pohl
 wrote:

> The feature freeze was postponed to July 24 (end of this week in
> Europe/early morning Monday in East Asia) in [1]. What's the 1.18 release
> managers' take on all the FLIPs that were recently started and require some
> deprecation work (which ideally should go into 1.18)? How does that work
> with the feature freeze happening by the end of this week?
>
> - Do we plan to extend the feature freeze to allow deprecation changes to
> go in?
> - Do we consider depreciation work to be "not a new feature" which means
> that we're ok with merging them after the feature freeze?
>
> Best,
> Matthias
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9fck1m5llrnv5gx1od05tzx84oy0b4z0
>

[DISCUSS] Feature freeze and deprecation work for 2.0

[Matthias Pohl]

The feature freeze was postponed to July 24 (end of this week in
Europe/early morning Monday in East Asia) in [1]. What's the 1.18 release
managers' take on all the FLIPs that were recently started and require some
deprecation work (which ideally should go into 1.18)? How does that work
with the feature freeze happening by the end of this week?

- Do we plan to extend the feature freeze to allow deprecation changes to
go in?
- Do we consider depreciation work to be "not a new feature" which means
that we're ok with merging them after the feature freeze?

Best,
Matthias

[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9fck1m5llrnv5gx1od05tzx84oy0b4z0

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Kurt Young]

Hi Yuval,

I think you are good to go, since there is no objection from PMC.

Best,
Kurt


On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 12:48 AM Yuval Itzchakov  wrote:

> Hi Guowei,
>
> Who should I speak to regarding this? I am at the final stages of the PR I
> believe (Shengkai is kindly helping me make things work) and I would like
> to push this into 1.13.
>
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 5:43 AM Guowei Ma  wrote:
>
>> Hi, Yuval
>>
>> Thanks for your contribution. I am not a SQL expert, but it seems to be
>> beneficial to users, and the amount of code is not much and only left is
>> the test. Therefore, I am open to this entry into rc1.
>> But according to the rules, you still have to see if there are other
>> PMC's objections within 48 hours.
>>
>> Best,
>> Guowei
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 10:33 PM Yuval Itzchakov 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I would really love to merge https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15307
>>> prior to 1.13 release cutoff, it just needs some more tests which I can
>>> hopefully get to today / tomorrow morning.
>>>
>>> This is a critical fix as now predicate pushdown won't work for any
>>> stream which generates a watermark and wants to push down predicates.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021, 10:56 Kurt Young  wrote:
>>>
 Thanks Dawid, I have merged FLINK-20320.

 Best,
 Kurt


 On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:49 PM Dawid Wysakowicz 
 wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> @Kurt @Arvid I think it's fine to merge those two, as they are pretty
> much finished. We can wait for those two before creating the RC0.
>
> @Leonard Personally I'd be ok with 3 more days for that single PR. I
> find the request reasonable and I second that it's better to have a proper
> review rather than rush unfinished feature and try to fix it later.
> Moreover it got broader support. Unless somebody else objects, I think we
> can merge this PR later and include it in RC1.
>
> Best,
>
> Dawid
> On 01/04/2021 08:39, Arvid Heise wrote:
>
> Hi Dawid and Guowei,
>
> I'd like to merge [FLINK-13550][rest][ui] Vertex Flame Graph [1]. We
> are pretty much just waiting for AZP to turn green, it's separate from
> other components, and it's a super useful feature for Flink users.
>
> Best,
>
> Arvid
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15054
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:21 AM Kurt Young  wrote:
>
>> Hi Guowei and Dawid,
>>
>> I want to request the permission to merge this feature [1], it's a
>> useful improvement to sql client and won't affect
>> other components too much. We were plan to merge it yesterday but met
>> some tricky multi-process issue which
>> has a very high possibility hanging the tests. It took us a while to
>> find out the root cause and fix it.
>>
>> Since it's not too far away from feature freeze and RC0 also not
>> created yet, thus I would like to include this
>> in 1.13.
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20320
>>
>> Best,
>> Kurt
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 5:55 PM Guowei Ma 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, community:
>>>
>>> Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature
>>> development. Under normal circumstances, you will not be able to submit 
>>> new
>>> features from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will create 1.13.0-rc0 for
>>> testing, welcome to help test together.
>>> After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the release-1.13
>>> branch.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Dawid & Guowei
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.

 Cheers,
 Till

 On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger <
 rmetz...@apache.org> wrote:

 > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
 >
 >
 >
 > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz <
 dwysakow...@apache.org>
 > wrote:
 >
 > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
 > >
 > > Best,
 > >
 > > Dawid
 > >
 > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
 > > > Hi Dawid,
 > > >
 > > > Thanks for the heads up.
 > > >
 > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge
 option
 > useful,
 > > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The
 following
 > > should
 > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
 > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
 > > >
 > > > Thanks,
 > > > Thomas
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
 > 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Guowei Ma]

Hi, Yuval

Thanks for your contribution. I am not a SQL expert, but it seems to be
beneficial to users, and the amount of code is not much and only left is
the test. Therefore, I am open to this entry into rc1.
But according to the rules, you still have to see if there are other PMC's
objections within 48 hours.

Best,
Guowei


On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 10:33 PM Yuval Itzchakov  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I would really love to merge https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15307
> prior to 1.13 release cutoff, it just needs some more tests which I can
> hopefully get to today / tomorrow morning.
>
> This is a critical fix as now predicate pushdown won't work for any stream
> which generates a watermark and wants to push down predicates.
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021, 10:56 Kurt Young  wrote:
>
>> Thanks Dawid, I have merged FLINK-20320.
>>
>> Best,
>> Kurt
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:49 PM Dawid Wysakowicz 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> @Kurt @Arvid I think it's fine to merge those two, as they are pretty
>>> much finished. We can wait for those two before creating the RC0.
>>>
>>> @Leonard Personally I'd be ok with 3 more days for that single PR. I
>>> find the request reasonable and I second that it's better to have a proper
>>> review rather than rush unfinished feature and try to fix it later.
>>> Moreover it got broader support. Unless somebody else objects, I think we
>>> can merge this PR later and include it in RC1.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Dawid
>>> On 01/04/2021 08:39, Arvid Heise wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Dawid and Guowei,
>>>
>>> I'd like to merge [FLINK-13550][rest][ui] Vertex Flame Graph [1]. We are
>>> pretty much just waiting for AZP to turn green, it's separate from other
>>> components, and it's a super useful feature for Flink users.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Arvid
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15054
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:21 AM Kurt Young  wrote:
>>>
 Hi Guowei and Dawid,

 I want to request the permission to merge this feature [1], it's a
 useful improvement to sql client and won't affect
 other components too much. We were plan to merge it yesterday but met
 some tricky multi-process issue which
 has a very high possibility hanging the tests. It took us a while to
 find out the root cause and fix it.

 Since it's not too far away from feature freeze and RC0 also not
 created yet, thus I would like to include this
 in 1.13.

 [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20320

 Best,
 Kurt


 On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 5:55 PM Guowei Ma  wrote:

> Hi, community:
>
> Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature
> development. Under normal circumstances, you will not be able to submit 
> new
> features from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will create 1.13.0-rc0 for
> testing, welcome to help test together.
> After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the release-1.13
> branch.
>
> Best,
> Dawid & Guowei
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz <
>> dwysakow...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
>> > >
>> > > Best,
>> > >
>> > > Dawid
>> > >
>> > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
>> > > > Hi Dawid,
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for the heads up.
>> > > >
>> > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge
>> option
>> > useful,
>> > > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The
>> following
>> > > should
>> > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
>> > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Thomas
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
>> > dwysakow...@apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Hi devs, users!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
>> > > >>
>> > > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be
>> the time
>> > > for
>> > > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it
>> still seems
>> > > to
>> > > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a
>> particular
>> > > date,
>> > > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March
>> 31st*
>> > > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after
>> the

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Yuval Itzchakov]

Hi All,

I would really love to merge https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15307
prior to 1.13 release cutoff, it just needs some more tests which I can
hopefully get to today / tomorrow morning.

This is a critical fix as now predicate pushdown won't work for any stream
which generates a watermark and wants to push down predicates.

On Thu, Apr 1, 2021, 10:56 Kurt Young  wrote:

> Thanks Dawid, I have merged FLINK-20320.
>
> Best,
> Kurt
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:49 PM Dawid Wysakowicz 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> @Kurt @Arvid I think it's fine to merge those two, as they are pretty
>> much finished. We can wait for those two before creating the RC0.
>>
>> @Leonard Personally I'd be ok with 3 more days for that single PR. I find
>> the request reasonable and I second that it's better to have a proper
>> review rather than rush unfinished feature and try to fix it later.
>> Moreover it got broader support. Unless somebody else objects, I think we
>> can merge this PR later and include it in RC1.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Dawid
>> On 01/04/2021 08:39, Arvid Heise wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dawid and Guowei,
>>
>> I'd like to merge [FLINK-13550][rest][ui] Vertex Flame Graph [1]. We are
>> pretty much just waiting for AZP to turn green, it's separate from other
>> components, and it's a super useful feature for Flink users.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Arvid
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15054
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:21 AM Kurt Young  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Guowei and Dawid,
>>>
>>> I want to request the permission to merge this feature [1], it's a
>>> useful improvement to sql client and won't affect
>>> other components too much. We were plan to merge it yesterday but met
>>> some tricky multi-process issue which
>>> has a very high possibility hanging the tests. It took us a while to
>>> find out the root cause and fix it.
>>>
>>> Since it's not too far away from feature freeze and RC0 also not created
>>> yet, thus I would like to include this
>>> in 1.13.
>>>
>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20320
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Kurt
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 5:55 PM Guowei Ma  wrote:
>>>
 Hi, community:

 Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature
 development. Under normal circumstances, you will not be able to submit new
 features from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will create 1.13.0-rc0 for
 testing, welcome to help test together.
 After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the release-1.13
 branch.

 Best,
 Dawid & Guowei


 On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann 
 wrote:

> +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz <
> dwysakow...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Dawid
> > >
> > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
> > > > Hi Dawid,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the heads up.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option
> > useful,
> > > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The
> following
> > > should
> > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
> > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Thomas
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
> > dwysakow...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi devs, users!
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
> > > >>
> > > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be
> the time
> > > for
> > > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it
> still seems
> > > to
> > > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a
> particular
> > > date,
> > > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
> > > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
> > > >>
> > > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after
> the
> > > feature
> > > >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running
> smoothly, and
> > to
> > > >> have a common testing reference point.
> > > >>
> > > >> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the
> previous
> > > >> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
> > > >>
> > > >> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no
> new
> > > >> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
> > > >> documentation improvements.
> > > >> The release 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Kurt Young]

Thanks Dawid, I have merged FLINK-20320.

Best,
Kurt


On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:49 PM Dawid Wysakowicz 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> @Kurt @Arvid I think it's fine to merge those two, as they are pretty much
> finished. We can wait for those two before creating the RC0.
>
> @Leonard Personally I'd be ok with 3 more days for that single PR. I find
> the request reasonable and I second that it's better to have a proper
> review rather than rush unfinished feature and try to fix it later.
> Moreover it got broader support. Unless somebody else objects, I think we
> can merge this PR later and include it in RC1.
>
> Best,
>
> Dawid
> On 01/04/2021 08:39, Arvid Heise wrote:
>
> Hi Dawid and Guowei,
>
> I'd like to merge [FLINK-13550][rest][ui] Vertex Flame Graph [1]. We are
> pretty much just waiting for AZP to turn green, it's separate from other
> components, and it's a super useful feature for Flink users.
>
> Best,
>
> Arvid
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15054
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:21 AM Kurt Young  wrote:
>
>> Hi Guowei and Dawid,
>>
>> I want to request the permission to merge this feature [1], it's a useful
>> improvement to sql client and won't affect
>> other components too much. We were plan to merge it yesterday but met
>> some tricky multi-process issue which
>> has a very high possibility hanging the tests. It took us a while to find
>> out the root cause and fix it.
>>
>> Since it's not too far away from feature freeze and RC0 also not created
>> yet, thus I would like to include this
>> in 1.13.
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20320
>>
>> Best,
>> Kurt
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 5:55 PM Guowei Ma  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, community:
>>>
>>> Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature
>>> development. Under normal circumstances, you will not be able to submit new
>>> features from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will create 1.13.0-rc0 for
>>> testing, welcome to help test together.
>>> After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the release-1.13 branch.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Dawid & Guowei
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.

 Cheers,
 Till

 On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger 
 wrote:

 > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
 >
 >
 >
 > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz <
 dwysakow...@apache.org>
 > wrote:
 >
 > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
 > >
 > > Best,
 > >
 > > Dawid
 > >
 > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
 > > > Hi Dawid,
 > > >
 > > > Thanks for the heads up.
 > > >
 > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option
 > useful,
 > > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The
 following
 > > should
 > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
 > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
 > > >
 > > > Thanks,
 > > > Thomas
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
 > dwysakow...@apache.org
 > > >
 > > > wrote:
 > > >
 > > >> Hi devs, users!
 > > >>
 > > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
 > > >>
 > > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the
 time
 > > for
 > > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still
 seems
 > > to
 > > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a
 particular
 > > date,
 > > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
 > > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
 > > >>
 > > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after
 the
 > > feature
 > > >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running
 smoothly, and
 > to
 > > >> have a common testing reference point.
 > > >>
 > > >> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the
 previous
 > > >> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
 > > >>
 > > >> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no
 new
 > > >> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
 > > >> documentation improvements.
 > > >> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the
 feature
 > > >> freeze.
 > > >> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the
 > system
 > > >> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to
 introduce new
 > > >> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
 > > >> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open
 a
 > > >> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC
 > member
 > > >> within 48 (workday)hours, 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Dawid Wysakowicz]

Hi all,

@Kurt @Arvid I think it's fine to merge those two, as they are pretty
much finished. We can wait for those two before creating the RC0.

@Leonard Personally I'd be ok with 3 more days for that single PR. I
find the request reasonable and I second that it's better to have a
proper review rather than rush unfinished feature and try to fix it
later. Moreover it got broader support. Unless somebody else objects, I
think we can merge this PR later and include it in RC1.

Best,

Dawid

On 01/04/2021 08:39, Arvid Heise wrote:
> Hi Dawid and Guowei,
>
> I'd like to merge [FLINK-13550][rest][ui] Vertex Flame Graph [1]. We
> are pretty much just waiting for AZP to turn green, it's separate from
> other components, and it's a super useful feature for Flink users.
>
> Best,
>
> Arvid
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15054
> 
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:21 AM Kurt Young  > wrote:
>
> Hi Guowei and Dawid,
>
> I want to request the permission to merge this feature [1], it's a
> useful improvement to sql client and won't affect 
> other components too much. We were plan to merge it yesterday but
> met some tricky multi-process issue which 
> has a very high possibility hanging the tests. It took us a while
> to find out the root cause and fix it. 
>
> Since it's not too far away from feature freeze and RC0 also not
> created yet, thus I would like to include this
> in 1.13. 
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20320
> 
>
> Best,
> Kurt
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 5:55 PM Guowei Ma  > wrote:
>
> Hi, community:
>
> Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature
> development. Under normal circumstances, you will not be able
> to submit new features from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will
> create 1.13.0-rc0 for testing, welcome to help test together.
> After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the
> release-1.13 branch.
>
> Best,
> Dawid & Guowei
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann
> mailto:trohrm...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger
> mailto:rmetz...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz
> mailto:dwysakow...@apache.org>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you
> linked.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Dawid
> > >
> > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
> > > > Hi Dawid,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the heads up.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that
> merge option
> > useful,
> > > > especially for small simple changes and for
> backports. The following
> > > should
> > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
> > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
> 
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Thomas
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
> > dwysakow...@apache.org 
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi devs, users!
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
> > > >>
> > > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed
> would be the time
> > > for
> > > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so
> far it still seems
> > > to
> > > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to
> agree on a particular
> > > date,
> > > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day
> CEST) March 31st*
> > > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
> > > >>
> > > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on
> the day after the
> > > feature
> > > >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is
> running smoothly, and
> > to
> > > >> have a common testing reference point.
> > > >>
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Arvid Heise]

Hi Dawid and Guowei,

I'd like to merge [FLINK-13550][rest][ui] Vertex Flame Graph [1]. We are
pretty much just waiting for AZP to turn green, it's separate from other
components, and it's a super useful feature for Flink users.

Best,

Arvid

[1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15054

On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:21 AM Kurt Young  wrote:

> Hi Guowei and Dawid,
>
> I want to request the permission to merge this feature [1], it's a useful
> improvement to sql client and won't affect
> other components too much. We were plan to merge it yesterday but met some
> tricky multi-process issue which
> has a very high possibility hanging the tests. It took us a while to find
> out the root cause and fix it.
>
> Since it's not too far away from feature freeze and RC0 also not created
> yet, thus I would like to include this
> in 1.13.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20320
>
> Best,
> Kurt
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 5:55 PM Guowei Ma  wrote:
>
>> Hi, community:
>>
>> Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature
>> development. Under normal circumstances, you will not be able to submit new
>> features from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will create 1.13.0-rc0 for
>> testing, welcome to help test together.
>> After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the release-1.13 branch.
>>
>> Best,
>> Dawid & Guowei
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Till
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz <
>>> dwysakow...@apache.org>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
>>> > >
>>> > > Best,
>>> > >
>>> > > Dawid
>>> > >
>>> > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
>>> > > > Hi Dawid,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks for the heads up.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option
>>> > useful,
>>> > > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The
>>> following
>>> > > should
>>> > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
>>> > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks,
>>> > > > Thomas
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
>>> > dwysakow...@apache.org
>>> > > >
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >> Hi devs, users!
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the
>>> time
>>> > > for
>>> > > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still
>>> seems
>>> > > to
>>> > > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a
>>> particular
>>> > > date,
>>> > > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
>>> > > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the
>>> > > feature
>>> > > >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running smoothly,
>>> and
>>> > to
>>> > > >> have a common testing reference point.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the
>>> previous
>>> > > >> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no
>>> new
>>> > > >> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
>>> > > >> documentation improvements.
>>> > > >> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the
>>> feature
>>> > > >> freeze.
>>> > > >> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the
>>> > system
>>> > > >> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to
>>> introduce new
>>> > > >> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
>>> > > >> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open a
>>> > > >> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC
>>> > member
>>> > > >> within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be merged.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> 2. *Merge PRs from the command line*
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature
>>> Freeze
>>> > > date
>>> > > >> that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not
>>> compile
>>> > > or
>>> > > >> there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent merges
>>> to the
>>> > > main
>>> > > >> branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome the problem
>>> we
>>> > > would
>>> > > >> like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a command line. Thank
>>> you
>>> > > >> Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow would look as
>>> follows:
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
>>> > > >>2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster
>>> than
>>> > > 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Kurt Young]

Hi Guowei and Dawid,

I want to request the permission to merge this feature [1], it's a useful
improvement to sql client and won't affect
other components too much. We were plan to merge it yesterday but met some
tricky multi-process issue which
has a very high possibility hanging the tests. It took us a while to find
out the root cause and fix it.

Since it's not too far away from feature freeze and RC0 also not created
yet, thus I would like to include this
in 1.13.

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20320

Best,
Kurt


On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 5:55 PM Guowei Ma  wrote:

> Hi, community:
>
> Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature
> development. Under normal circumstances, you will not be able to submit new
> features from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will create 1.13.0-rc0 for
> testing, welcome to help test together.
> After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the release-1.13 branch.
>
> Best,
> Dawid & Guowei
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz <
>> dwysakow...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
>> > >
>> > > Best,
>> > >
>> > > Dawid
>> > >
>> > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
>> > > > Hi Dawid,
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for the heads up.
>> > > >
>> > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option
>> > useful,
>> > > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The following
>> > > should
>> > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
>> > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Thomas
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
>> > dwysakow...@apache.org
>> > > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Hi devs, users!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
>> > > >>
>> > > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the
>> time
>> > > for
>> > > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still
>> seems
>> > > to
>> > > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a
>> particular
>> > > date,
>> > > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
>> > > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the
>> > > feature
>> > > >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running smoothly,
>> and
>> > to
>> > > >> have a common testing reference point.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the
>> previous
>> > > >> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no new
>> > > >> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
>> > > >> documentation improvements.
>> > > >> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the
>> feature
>> > > >> freeze.
>> > > >> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the
>> > system
>> > > >> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to introduce
>> new
>> > > >> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
>> > > >> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open a
>> > > >> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC
>> > member
>> > > >> within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be merged.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> 2. *Merge PRs from the command line*
>> > > >>
>> > > >> In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature
>> Freeze
>> > > date
>> > > >> that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not
>> compile
>> > > or
>> > > >> there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent merges to
>> the
>> > > main
>> > > >> branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome the problem
>> we
>> > > would
>> > > >> like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a command line. Thank
>> you
>> > > >> Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow would look as follows:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
>> > > >>2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster than
>> > > >>building entire project from cmd) -> this should ensure the
>> project
>> > > compiles
>> > > >>3. Run the tests in the module that the change affects -> this
>> > should
>> > > >>greatly minimize the chances of failling tests
>> > > >>4. Push the change to the main branch
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Let us know what you think!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Best,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Guowei & Dawid
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Guowei Ma]

Hi, community:

Friendly reminder that today (3.31) is the last day of feature development.
Under normal circumstances, you will not be able to submit new features
from tomorrow (4.1). Tomorrow we will create 1.13.0-rc0 for testing,
welcome to help test together.
After the test is relatively stable, we will cut the release-1.13 branch.

Best,
Dawid & Guowei


On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:17 PM Till Rohrmann  wrote:

> +1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Dawid
> > >
> > > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
> > > > Hi Dawid,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the heads up.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option
> > useful,
> > > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The following
> > > should
> > > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
> > > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Thomas
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
> > dwysakow...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi devs, users!
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
> > > >>
> > > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the
> time
> > > for
> > > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still
> seems
> > > to
> > > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a particular
> > > date,
> > > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
> > > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
> > > >>
> > > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the
> > > feature
> > > >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running smoothly,
> and
> > to
> > > >> have a common testing reference point.
> > > >>
> > > >> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the previous
> > > >> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
> > > >>
> > > >> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no new
> > > >> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
> > > >> documentation improvements.
> > > >> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the
> feature
> > > >> freeze.
> > > >> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the
> > system
> > > >> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to introduce
> new
> > > >> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
> > > >> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open a
> > > >> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC
> > member
> > > >> within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be merged.
> > > >>
> > > >> 2. *Merge PRs from the command line*
> > > >>
> > > >> In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature Freeze
> > > date
> > > >> that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not
> compile
> > > or
> > > >> there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent merges to
> the
> > > main
> > > >> branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome the problem we
> > > would
> > > >> like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a command line. Thank you
> > > >> Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow would look as follows:
> > > >>
> > > >>1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
> > > >>2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster than
> > > >>building entire project from cmd) -> this should ensure the
> project
> > > compiles
> > > >>3. Run the tests in the module that the change affects -> this
> > should
> > > >>greatly minimize the chances of failling tests
> > > >>4. Push the change to the main branch
> > > >>
> > > >> Let us know what you think!
> > > >>
> > > >> Best,
> > > >>
> > > >> Guowei & Dawid
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Till Rohrmann]

+1 for the 31st of March for the feature freeze.

Cheers,
Till

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:12 AM Robert Metzger  wrote:

> +1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz 
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Dawid
> >
> > On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
> > > Hi Dawid,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the heads up.
> > >
> > > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option
> useful,
> > > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The following
> > should
> > > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
> > > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Thomas
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <
> dwysakow...@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi devs, users!
> > >>
> > >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
> > >>
> > >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the time
> > for
> > >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still seems
> > to
> > >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a particular
> > date,
> > >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
> > >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
> > >>
> > >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the
> > feature
> > >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running smoothly, and
> to
> > >> have a common testing reference point.
> > >>
> > >> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the previous
> > >> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
> > >>
> > >> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no new
> > >> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
> > >> documentation improvements.
> > >> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the feature
> > >> freeze.
> > >> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the
> system
> > >> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to introduce new
> > >> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
> > >> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open a
> > >> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC
> member
> > >> within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be merged.
> > >>
> > >> 2. *Merge PRs from the command line*
> > >>
> > >> In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature Freeze
> > date
> > >> that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not compile
> > or
> > >> there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent merges to the
> > main
> > >> branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome the problem we
> > would
> > >> like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a command line. Thank you
> > >> Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow would look as follows:
> > >>
> > >>1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
> > >>2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster than
> > >>building entire project from cmd) -> this should ensure the project
> > compiles
> > >>3. Run the tests in the module that the change affects -> this
> should
> > >>greatly minimize the chances of failling tests
> > >>4. Push the change to the main branch
> > >>
> > >> Let us know what you think!
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >>
> > >> Guowei & Dawid
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Robert Metzger]

+1 for March 31st for the feature freeze.



On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:39 PM Dawid Wysakowicz 
wrote:

> Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.
>
> Best,
>
> Dawid
>
> On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
> > Hi Dawid,
> >
> > Thanks for the heads up.
> >
> > Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option useful,
> > especially for small simple changes and for backports. The following
> should
> > help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
> > https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Thomas
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi devs, users!
> >>
> >> 1. *Feature freeze date*
> >>
> >> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the time
> for
> >> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still seems
> to
> >> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a particular
> date,
> >> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
> >> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
> >>
> >> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the
> feature
> >> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running smoothly, and to
> >> have a common testing reference point.
> >>
> >> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the previous
> >> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
> >>
> >> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no new
> >> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
> >> documentation improvements.
> >> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the feature
> >> freeze.
> >> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the system
> >> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to introduce new
> >> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
> >> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open a
> >> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC member
> >> within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be merged.
> >>
> >> 2. *Merge PRs from the command line*
> >>
> >> In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature Freeze
> date
> >> that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not compile
> or
> >> there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent merges to the
> main
> >> branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome the problem we
> would
> >> like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a command line. Thank you
> >> Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow would look as follows:
> >>
> >>1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
> >>2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster than
> >>building entire project from cmd) -> this should ensure the project
> compiles
> >>3. Run the tests in the module that the change affects -> this should
> >>greatly minimize the chances of failling tests
> >>4. Push the change to the main branch
> >>
> >> Let us know what you think!
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Guowei & Dawid
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Dawid Wysakowicz]

Thank you Thomas! I'll definitely check the issue you linked.

Best,

Dawid

On 23/03/2021 20:35, Thomas Weise wrote:
> Hi Dawid,
>
> Thanks for the heads up.
>
> Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option useful,
> especially for small simple changes and for backports. The following should
> help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
> https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi devs, users!
>>
>> 1. *Feature freeze date*
>>
>> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the time for
>> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still seems to
>> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a particular date,
>> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
>> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
>>
>> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the feature
>> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running smoothly, and to
>> have a common testing reference point.
>>
>> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the previous
>> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
>>
>> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no new
>> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
>> documentation improvements.
>> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the feature
>> freeze.
>> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the system
>> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to introduce new
>> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
>> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open a
>> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC member
>> within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be merged.
>>
>> 2. *Merge PRs from the command line*
>>
>> In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature Freeze date
>> that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not compile or
>> there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent merges to the main
>> branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome the problem we would
>> like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a command line. Thank you
>> Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow would look as follows:
>>
>>1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
>>2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster than
>>building entire project from cmd) -> this should ensure the project 
>> compiles
>>3. Run the tests in the module that the change affects -> this should
>>greatly minimize the chances of failling tests
>>4. Push the change to the main branch
>>
>> Let us know what you think!
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Guowei & Dawid
>>
>>
>>



OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Thomas Weise]

Hi Dawid,

Thanks for the heads up.

Regarding the "Rebase and merge" button. I find that merge option useful,
especially for small simple changes and for backports. The following should
help to safeguard from the issue encountered previously:
https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/issues/1085

Thanks,
Thomas


On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 AM Dawid Wysakowicz 
wrote:

> Hi devs, users!
>
> 1. *Feature freeze date*
>
> We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the time for
> a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still seems to
> be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a particular date,
> when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST) March 31st*
> (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.
>
> Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the feature
> freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running smoothly, and to
> have a common testing reference point.
>
> Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the previous
> release what it a Feature Freeze means:
>
> *B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no new
> features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
> documentation improvements.
> The release managers will revert new feature commits after the feature
> freeze.
> Rational: The goal of the feature freeze phase is to improve the system
> stability by addressing known bugs. New features tend to introduce new
> instabilities, which would prolong the release process.
> If you need to merge a new feature after the freeze, please open a
> discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no objections by a PMC member
> within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be merged.
>
> 2. *Merge PRs from the command line*
>
> In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature Freeze date
> that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not compile or
> there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent merges to the main
> branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome the problem we would
> like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a command line. Thank you
> Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow would look as follows:
>
>1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
>2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster than
>building entire project from cmd) -> this should ensure the project 
> compiles
>3. Run the tests in the module that the change affects -> this should
>greatly minimize the chances of failling tests
>4. Push the change to the main branch
>
> Let us know what you think!
>
> Best,
>
> Guowei & Dawid
>
>
>

[DISCUSS] Feature freeze date for 1.13

[Dawid Wysakowicz]

Hi devs, users!

1. *Feature freeze date*

We are approaching the end of March which we agreed would be the time
for a Feature Freeze. From the knowledge I've gather so far it still
seems to be a viable plan. I think it is a good time to agree on a
particular date, when it should happen. We suggest *(end of day CEST)
March 31st* (Wednesday next week) as the feature freeze time.

Similarly as last time, we want to create RC0 on the day after the
feature freeze, to make sure the RC creation process is running
smoothly, and to have a common testing reference point.

Having said that let us remind after Robert & Dian from the previous
release what it a Feature Freeze means:

*B) What does feature freeze mean?*After the feature freeze, no new
features are allowed to be merged to master. Only bug fixes and
documentation improvements. The release managers will revert new feature
commits after the feature freeze. Rational: The goal of the feature
freeze phase is to improve the system stability by addressing known
bugs. New features tend to introduce new instabilities, which would
prolong the release process. If you need to merge a new feature after
the freeze, please open a discussion on the dev@ list. If there are no
objections by a PMC member within 48 (workday)hours, the feature can be
merged.

2. *Merge PRs from the command line*

In the past releases it was quite frequent around the Feature Freeze
date that we ended up with a broken main branch that either did not
compile or there were failing tests. It was often due to concurrent
merges to the main branch via the "Rebase and merge" button. To overcome
the problem we would like to suggest only ever merging PRs from a
command line. Thank you Stephan for the idea! The suggested workflow
would look as follows:

 1. Pull the change and rebase on the current main branch
 2. Build the project (e.g. from IDE, which should be faster than
building entire project from cmd) -> this should ensure the project
compiles
 3. Run the tests in the module that the change affects -> this should
greatly minimize the chances of failling tests
 4. Push the change to the main branch

Let us know what you think!

Best,

Guowei & Dawid




OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze for Flink 1.7

[Till Rohrmann]

Thanks for the feedback.

For FLINK-10122, the proper solution would require the redesigned source
interface which will most likely not make it into the release. I think the
community is working hard on implementing it as fast as possible, though.

Concerning state migration, Gordon is the best to give an update. My hopes
are high that we can make a big step towards solving this problem once and
for all.

Cheers,
Till

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 11:20 AM David Anderson 
wrote:

> What would this timing mean for the epic around state schema evolution and
> state migration?
>
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 10:43 AM Piotr Nowojski 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think that’s a good time for the release, will give us some time before
> > holidays season for potential bug fixes.
> >
> > Piotrek
> >
> > > On 29 Sep 2018, at 05:08, Steven Wu  wrote:
> > >
> > > Please prioritize a proper long-term fix for this issue. it is a big
> > > scalability issue for high-parallelism job (e.g. over 1,000).
> > >
> > > FLINK-10122 KafkaConsumer should use partitionable state over union
> state
> > > if partition discovery is not active
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:20 AM Till Rohrmann 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Dear community,
> > >>
> > >> almost 2 months have passed since the Flink 1.6 release and some good
> > >> features for the next major release are close to completion.
> Therefore,
> > I
> > >> would like to discuss a possible feature freeze for Flink 1.7.
> > >>
> > >> Given that we've released Flink 1.6 at the beginning of August, I
> would
> > >> like to aim for the end of October beginning of November for the 1.7
> > >> release date. In order to have enough time for release testing, I
> would
> > >> therefore propose the 22nd of October as the feature freeze deadline.
> > >>
> > >> What do you think about this date (realistic, too early, too late) and
> > >> which features/issues do you think should get priority?
> > >>
> > >> Since every release needs a release manager, I would also volunteer
> for
> > it.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Till
> > >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> *David Anderson* | Training Coordinator | data Artisans
> --
> Join Flink Forward - The Apache Flink Conference
> Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze for Flink 1.7

[David Anderson]

What would this timing mean for the epic around state schema evolution and
state migration?

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 10:43 AM Piotr Nowojski 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think that’s a good time for the release, will give us some time before
> holidays season for potential bug fixes.
>
> Piotrek
>
> > On 29 Sep 2018, at 05:08, Steven Wu  wrote:
> >
> > Please prioritize a proper long-term fix for this issue. it is a big
> > scalability issue for high-parallelism job (e.g. over 1,000).
> >
> > FLINK-10122 KafkaConsumer should use partitionable state over union state
> > if partition discovery is not active
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:20 AM Till Rohrmann 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear community,
> >>
> >> almost 2 months have passed since the Flink 1.6 release and some good
> >> features for the next major release are close to completion. Therefore,
> I
> >> would like to discuss a possible feature freeze for Flink 1.7.
> >>
> >> Given that we've released Flink 1.6 at the beginning of August, I would
> >> like to aim for the end of October beginning of November for the 1.7
> >> release date. In order to have enough time for release testing, I would
> >> therefore propose the 22nd of October as the feature freeze deadline.
> >>
> >> What do you think about this date (realistic, too early, too late) and
> >> which features/issues do you think should get priority?
> >>
> >> Since every release needs a release manager, I would also volunteer for
> it.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Till
> >>
>
>

-- 
*David Anderson* | Training Coordinator | data Artisans
--
Join Flink Forward - The Apache Flink Conference
Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze for Flink 1.7

[Piotr Nowojski]

Hi,

I think that’s a good time for the release, will give us some time before 
holidays season for potential bug fixes.

Piotrek

> On 29 Sep 2018, at 05:08, Steven Wu  wrote:
> 
> Please prioritize a proper long-term fix for this issue. it is a big
> scalability issue for high-parallelism job (e.g. over 1,000).
> 
> FLINK-10122 KafkaConsumer should use partitionable state over union state
> if partition discovery is not active
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:20 AM Till Rohrmann  wrote:
> 
>> Dear community,
>> 
>> almost 2 months have passed since the Flink 1.6 release and some good
>> features for the next major release are close to completion. Therefore, I
>> would like to discuss a possible feature freeze for Flink 1.7.
>> 
>> Given that we've released Flink 1.6 at the beginning of August, I would
>> like to aim for the end of October beginning of November for the 1.7
>> release date. In order to have enough time for release testing, I would
>> therefore propose the 22nd of October as the feature freeze deadline.
>> 
>> What do you think about this date (realistic, too early, too late) and
>> which features/issues do you think should get priority?
>> 
>> Since every release needs a release manager, I would also volunteer for it.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze for Flink 1.7

[Steven Wu]

Please prioritize a proper long-term fix for this issue. it is a big
scalability issue for high-parallelism job (e.g. over 1,000).

FLINK-10122 KafkaConsumer should use partitionable state over union state
if partition discovery is not active


On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:20 AM Till Rohrmann  wrote:

> Dear community,
>
> almost 2 months have passed since the Flink 1.6 release and some good
> features for the next major release are close to completion. Therefore, I
> would like to discuss a possible feature freeze for Flink 1.7.
>
> Given that we've released Flink 1.6 at the beginning of August, I would
> like to aim for the end of October beginning of November for the 1.7
> release date. In order to have enough time for release testing, I would
> therefore propose the 22nd of October as the feature freeze deadline.
>
> What do you think about this date (realistic, too early, too late) and
> which features/issues do you think should get priority?
>
> Since every release needs a release manager, I would also volunteer for it.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>

[DISCUSS] Feature freeze for Flink 1.7

[Till Rohrmann]

Dear community,

almost 2 months have passed since the Flink 1.6 release and some good
features for the next major release are close to completion. Therefore, I
would like to discuss a possible feature freeze for Flink 1.7.

Given that we've released Flink 1.6 at the beginning of August, I would
like to aim for the end of October beginning of November for the 1.7
release date. In order to have enough time for release testing, I would
therefore propose the 22nd of October as the feature freeze deadline.

What do you think about this date (realistic, too early, too late) and
which features/issues do you think should get priority?

Since every release needs a release manager, I would also volunteer for it.

Cheers,
Till

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature freeze for Flink 1.6

[Till Rohrmann]

I assume that we reached a silent consensus here. I will then announce the
feature freeze date on the dev mailing list.

Cheers,
Till

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 6:31 PM Till Rohrmann  wrote:

> Dear community,
>
> as discussed in the Flink 1.6 feature thread [1], the proposed release
> date of *end of July* for Flink 1.6 is getting closer. Since we need a
> release manager I would first of all volunteer for it.
>
> With Flink 1.5, the community invested a lot of time into release and test
> automation. This helps us to cut down the release overhead considerably.
> However, I would still plan for a bug fixing and testing period of two
> weeks to be on the safe side.
>
> Given this testing period, I would propose to do the feature freeze on the
> 15th of July 23:59 CET in order to keep the release date. This means that
> we would cut the Flink 1.6 release branch on this date and no more feature
> contributions would be accepted for this branch.
>
> I know that not all of the features the community is working on are
> completed yet. But don't worry, since the community wants to release more
> often with shorter release cycles, features which won't be completed for
> Flink 1.6 will then be shipped with Flink 1.7.
>
> What do you think concerning the proposed feature freeze?
>
> [1]
> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Flink-1-6-features-td22632.html
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>

[DISCUSS] Feature freeze for Flink 1.6

[Till Rohrmann]

Dear community,

as discussed in the Flink 1.6 feature thread [1], the proposed release date
of *end of July* for Flink 1.6 is getting closer. Since we need a release
manager I would first of all volunteer for it.

With Flink 1.5, the community invested a lot of time into release and test
automation. This helps us to cut down the release overhead considerably.
However, I would still plan for a bug fixing and testing period of two
weeks to be on the safe side.

Given this testing period, I would propose to do the feature freeze on the
15th of July 23:59 CET in order to keep the release date. This means that
we would cut the Flink 1.6 release branch on this date and no more feature
contributions would be accepted for this branch.

I know that not all of the features the community is working on are
completed yet. But don't worry, since the community wants to release more
often with shorter release cycles, features which won't be completed for
Flink 1.6 will then be shipped with Flink 1.7.

What do you think concerning the proposed feature freeze?

[1]
http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Flink-1-6-features-td22632.html

Cheers,
Till

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Chesnay Schepler]

It's not really a release candidate in that sense, but a common test 
release that everyone should work against.


This gives us a consistent view about the state at commit X, as opposed 
to testing directly against the branch where it is likely everyone works 
on a different version.


On 08.05.2017 09:56, Kostas Kloudas wrote:

Hi Robert,

Thanks for starting the process!

My only remark is that given that the master is unstable, does it make sense to 
create an RC0?

Kostas


On May 8, 2017, at 8:52 AM, Robert Metzger  wrote:

Great!
It also looks like the other big features made it also into master this
weekend.

I'll now create the feature branch and create the testing RC0.

On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Fabian Hueske  wrote:


I merged the last to major features for the Table API / SQL (time
indicators and retraction support) to master.
We will need to work on some smaller issues for those features which will
take a few more days (1 week max), but the big changes are in.

Working on those final issue does not block a release candidate. The Table
API / SQL are on top of the DataStream API and runtime.
So the last fixes won't interfere with testing the lower levels of the
system.

Cheers, Fabian

2017-05-05 21:02 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen :


Yes, I second Ufuk, thanks Robert and Aljoscha for the effort.

Thanks to the community for hard work on the features.

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Ufuk Celebi  wrote:


On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Stephan Ewen  wrote:

Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not

make

any

difference anyways...

If no one tests a RC (if created today) over the weekend it also
wouldn't make a difference. ;-)

Thanks to all for chiming in here and Robert and Aljoscha especially
for making sure that everyone is on the same page wrt blockers etc.

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Robert Metzger]

It depends :)
If the unstable tests are caused by a bug in the tests itself, its not an
issue. If its a blocking issue in one of the core components, I'll
immediately create a new RC.
Part of the reason why I'm creating the RC0 is also to ensure that the
build infrastructure properly works.

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Kostas Kloudas 
wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> Thanks for starting the process!
>
> My only remark is that given that the master is unstable, does it make
> sense to create an RC0?
>
> Kostas
>
> > On May 8, 2017, at 8:52 AM, Robert Metzger  wrote:
> >
> > Great!
> > It also looks like the other big features made it also into master this
> > weekend.
> >
> > I'll now create the feature branch and create the testing RC0.
> >
> > On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Fabian Hueske 
> wrote:
> >
> >> I merged the last to major features for the Table API / SQL (time
> >> indicators and retraction support) to master.
> >> We will need to work on some smaller issues for those features which
> will
> >> take a few more days (1 week max), but the big changes are in.
> >>
> >> Working on those final issue does not block a release candidate. The
> Table
> >> API / SQL are on top of the DataStream API and runtime.
> >> So the last fixes won't interfere with testing the lower levels of the
> >> system.
> >>
> >> Cheers, Fabian
> >>
> >> 2017-05-05 21:02 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen :
> >>
> >>> Yes, I second Ufuk, thanks Robert and Aljoscha for the effort.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks to the community for hard work on the features.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Ufuk Celebi  wrote:
> >>>
>  On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Stephan Ewen 
> wrote:
> > Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not
> >> make
>  any
> > difference anyways...
> 
>  If no one tests a RC (if created today) over the weekend it also
>  wouldn't make a difference. ;-)
> 
>  Thanks to all for chiming in here and Robert and Aljoscha especially
>  for making sure that everyone is on the same page wrt blockers etc.
> 
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Kostas Kloudas]

Hi Robert, 

Thanks for starting the process!

My only remark is that given that the master is unstable, does it make sense to 
create an RC0?

Kostas

> On May 8, 2017, at 8:52 AM, Robert Metzger  wrote:
> 
> Great!
> It also looks like the other big features made it also into master this
> weekend.
> 
> I'll now create the feature branch and create the testing RC0.
> 
> On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Fabian Hueske  wrote:
> 
>> I merged the last to major features for the Table API / SQL (time
>> indicators and retraction support) to master.
>> We will need to work on some smaller issues for those features which will
>> take a few more days (1 week max), but the big changes are in.
>> 
>> Working on those final issue does not block a release candidate. The Table
>> API / SQL are on top of the DataStream API and runtime.
>> So the last fixes won't interfere with testing the lower levels of the
>> system.
>> 
>> Cheers, Fabian
>> 
>> 2017-05-05 21:02 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen :
>> 
>>> Yes, I second Ufuk, thanks Robert and Aljoscha for the effort.
>>> 
>>> Thanks to the community for hard work on the features.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Ufuk Celebi  wrote:
>>> 
 On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Stephan Ewen  wrote:
> Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not
>> make
 any
> difference anyways...
 
 If no one tests a RC (if created today) over the weekend it also
 wouldn't make a difference. ;-)
 
 Thanks to all for chiming in here and Robert and Aljoscha especially
 for making sure that everyone is on the same page wrt blockers etc.
 
>>> 
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Robert Metzger]

Great!
It also looks like the other big features made it also into master this
weekend.

I'll now create the feature branch and create the testing RC0.

On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Fabian Hueske  wrote:

> I merged the last to major features for the Table API / SQL (time
> indicators and retraction support) to master.
> We will need to work on some smaller issues for those features which will
> take a few more days (1 week max), but the big changes are in.
>
> Working on those final issue does not block a release candidate. The Table
> API / SQL are on top of the DataStream API and runtime.
> So the last fixes won't interfere with testing the lower levels of the
> system.
>
> Cheers, Fabian
>
> 2017-05-05 21:02 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen :
>
> > Yes, I second Ufuk, thanks Robert and Aljoscha for the effort.
> >
> > Thanks to the community for hard work on the features.
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Ufuk Celebi  wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Stephan Ewen  wrote:
> > > > Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not
> make
> > > any
> > > > difference anyways...
> > >
> > > If no one tests a RC (if created today) over the weekend it also
> > > wouldn't make a difference. ;-)
> > >
> > > Thanks to all for chiming in here and Robert and Aljoscha especially
> > > for making sure that everyone is on the same page wrt blockers etc.
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Fabian Hueske]

I merged the last to major features for the Table API / SQL (time
indicators and retraction support) to master.
We will need to work on some smaller issues for those features which will
take a few more days (1 week max), but the big changes are in.

Working on those final issue does not block a release candidate. The Table
API / SQL are on top of the DataStream API and runtime.
So the last fixes won't interfere with testing the lower levels of the
system.

Cheers, Fabian

2017-05-05 21:02 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen :

> Yes, I second Ufuk, thanks Robert and Aljoscha for the effort.
>
> Thanks to the community for hard work on the features.
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Ufuk Celebi  wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Stephan Ewen  wrote:
> > > Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not make
> > any
> > > difference anyways...
> >
> > If no one tests a RC (if created today) over the weekend it also
> > wouldn't make a difference. ;-)
> >
> > Thanks to all for chiming in here and Robert and Aljoscha especially
> > for making sure that everyone is on the same page wrt blockers etc.
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Stephan Ewen]

Yes, I second Ufuk, thanks Robert and Aljoscha for the effort.

Thanks to the community for hard work on the features.

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Ufuk Celebi  wrote:

> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Stephan Ewen  wrote:
> > Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not make
> any
> > difference anyways...
>
> If no one tests a RC (if created today) over the weekend it also
> wouldn't make a difference. ;-)
>
> Thanks to all for chiming in here and Robert and Aljoscha especially
> for making sure that everyone is on the same page wrt blockers etc.
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Ufuk Celebi]

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Stephan Ewen  wrote:
> Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not make any
> difference anyways...

If no one tests a RC (if created today) over the weekend it also
wouldn't make a difference. ;-)

Thanks to all for chiming in here and Robert and Aljoscha especially
for making sure that everyone is on the same page wrt blockers etc.

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Stephan Ewen]

@robert - thanks, I think that is nice. That gives fairness across
timezones.
Also, if no release candidate would be created today, it would not make any
difference anyways...

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote:

> To quickly clarify: I said Friday 3pm for the feature freeze in my Tuesday
> email, but I decided to actually turn it into a proper *"end of the week"
> by doing the feature freeze Sunday evening/Monday morning*.
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Radu Tudoran <radu.tudo...@huawei.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Sorry in case I missed something in the discussion of coming up with the
> > list of open threads, but there is also
> >
> > [FLINK-6075] Support Order By for Stream SQL (Support Limit/Top(Sort) for
> > Stream SQL)
> >
> > ...in case you want to consider it (it only needs a review)
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Robert Metzger [mailto:rmetz...@apache.org]
> > Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 10:43 AM
> > To: dev@flink.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> >
> > I've checked the release status again, and it seems that some more issues
> > made it into master, while other very big new features are still being
> > finished (incremental checkpointing, retractions, serializer upgrades and
> > automatic buffer management).
> >
> > I'll publish the first, non-voting, testing only RC0 on Monday morning.
> >
> >
> > Completed Features for 1.3
> > - TODO after feature freeze
> >
> > Blockers:
> > 12 blockers (4 documentation, 1 refcatoring) --> 8 real blockers (can be
> > fixed after the feature freeze)
> >
> >
> > Really important (open):
> > - FLINK-6364: Implement incremental checkpointing in RocksDBStateBackend
> > (pending PR)
> > - FLINK-6047: Add support for Retraction in Table API / SQL (depends on
> > FLINK-6093)
> > - FLINK-4545: Flink automatically manages TM network buffer (pending PR,
> > under review)
> > - FLINK-6178: Allow upgrades to state serializers (pending PR, no review
> )
> >
> >
> > Mentioned in the thread (open):
> > - FLINK-6033: Support UNNEST query in the stream SQL API (no PR)
> > - FLINK-6335: Parse DISTINCT over grouped window in stream SQL (pending
> PR)
> > - FLINK-6373: Add runtime support for distinct aggregation over grouped
> > windows (pending PR, under review)
> > - FLINK-6281: Create TableSink for JDBC (pending PR, under review)
> > - FLINK-6225: Support Row Stream for CassandraSink (pending PR, under
> > review)
> > - FLINK-6196: Support dynamic schema in Table Function (pending PR, under
> > review)
> > - FLINK-4022: Partition and topic discovery for FlinkKafkaConsumer
> > (pending PR, no review)
> > - FLINK-4821: Implement rescalable non-partitioned state for Kinesis
> > Connector (pending PR, under review)
> >
> > Closed:
> > - FLINK-6377: Support map types in the Table / SQL API (merged)
> > - FLINK-6398: RowSerializer's duplicate should always return a new
> instance
> > (merged)
> > - FLINK-5998: Un-fat Hadoop from Flink fat jar (merged)
> > - FLINK-6337: Remove the buffer provider from
> PartitionRequestServerHandler
> > (merged)
> > - FLINK-5892: Recover job state at the granularity of operator (merged)
> > - FLINK-5906: Add support to register user defined aggregates in
> > TableEnvironment (merged)
> > - FLINK-6334: Refactoring UDTF interface (merged)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This is the list of blocking issues for Flink 1.3:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5740?jql=project
> > > %20%3D%20FLINK%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%
> > > 20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20priority%20%3D%
> > > 20Blocker%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.3.0
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > > a/browse/FLINK-5740?jql=project%20=%20FLINK%20AND%20status%
> > > 20in%20(Open,%20%22In%20Progress%22,%20Reopened)%20AND%20priority%20=%
> > > 20Blocker%20AND%20fixVersion%20=%201.3.0>
> > >
> > > Could everyone please update the state of the issues mentioned in this
> > > thread to “blocking” and set the version to “1.3.0” if they feel that
> > > this is appropriate. Otherwise it is very hard for the release manager
> > > to get an overview over the progress of the release. With an
> > > up-to-date list it’s also possible to triage issues and discuss on t

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Robert Metzger]

To quickly clarify: I said Friday 3pm for the feature freeze in my Tuesday
email, but I decided to actually turn it into a proper *"end of the week"
by doing the feature freeze Sunday evening/Monday morning*.

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Radu Tudoran <radu.tudo...@huawei.com>
wrote:

> Sorry in case I missed something in the discussion of coming up with the
> list of open threads, but there is also
>
> [FLINK-6075] Support Order By for Stream SQL (Support Limit/Top(Sort) for
> Stream SQL)
>
> ...in case you want to consider it (it only needs a review)
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Metzger [mailto:rmetz...@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 10:43 AM
> To: dev@flink.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
>
> I've checked the release status again, and it seems that some more issues
> made it into master, while other very big new features are still being
> finished (incremental checkpointing, retractions, serializer upgrades and
> automatic buffer management).
>
> I'll publish the first, non-voting, testing only RC0 on Monday morning.
>
>
> Completed Features for 1.3
> - TODO after feature freeze
>
> Blockers:
> 12 blockers (4 documentation, 1 refcatoring) --> 8 real blockers (can be
> fixed after the feature freeze)
>
>
> Really important (open):
> - FLINK-6364: Implement incremental checkpointing in RocksDBStateBackend
> (pending PR)
> - FLINK-6047: Add support for Retraction in Table API / SQL (depends on
> FLINK-6093)
> - FLINK-4545: Flink automatically manages TM network buffer (pending PR,
> under review)
> - FLINK-6178: Allow upgrades to state serializers (pending PR, no review )
>
>
> Mentioned in the thread (open):
> - FLINK-6033: Support UNNEST query in the stream SQL API (no PR)
> - FLINK-6335: Parse DISTINCT over grouped window in stream SQL (pending PR)
> - FLINK-6373: Add runtime support for distinct aggregation over grouped
> windows (pending PR, under review)
> - FLINK-6281: Create TableSink for JDBC (pending PR, under review)
> - FLINK-6225: Support Row Stream for CassandraSink (pending PR, under
> review)
> - FLINK-6196: Support dynamic schema in Table Function (pending PR, under
> review)
> - FLINK-4022: Partition and topic discovery for FlinkKafkaConsumer
> (pending PR, no review)
> - FLINK-4821: Implement rescalable non-partitioned state for Kinesis
> Connector (pending PR, under review)
>
> Closed:
> - FLINK-6377: Support map types in the Table / SQL API (merged)
> - FLINK-6398: RowSerializer's duplicate should always return a new instance
> (merged)
> - FLINK-5998: Un-fat Hadoop from Flink fat jar (merged)
> - FLINK-6337: Remove the buffer provider from PartitionRequestServerHandler
> (merged)
> - FLINK-5892: Recover job state at the granularity of operator (merged)
> - FLINK-5906: Add support to register user defined aggregates in
> TableEnvironment (merged)
> - FLINK-6334: Refactoring UDTF interface (merged)
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > This is the list of blocking issues for Flink 1.3:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5740?jql=project
> > %20%3D%20FLINK%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%
> > 20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20priority%20%3D%
> > 20Blocker%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.3.0
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jir
> > a/browse/FLINK-5740?jql=project%20=%20FLINK%20AND%20status%
> > 20in%20(Open,%20%22In%20Progress%22,%20Reopened)%20AND%20priority%20=%
> > 20Blocker%20AND%20fixVersion%20=%201.3.0>
> >
> > Could everyone please update the state of the issues mentioned in this
> > thread to “blocking” and set the version to “1.3.0” if they feel that
> > this is appropriate. Otherwise it is very hard for the release manager
> > to get an overview over the progress of the release. With an
> > up-to-date list it’s also possible to triage issues and discuss on the
> > issue whether it really should be a release blocker.
> >
> > Best,
> > Aljoscha
> > > On 2. May 2017, at 22:29, Eron Wright <eronwri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Robert, I'd like to see FLINK-5974
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5974> (Mesos DNS
> > > support) added to the list of important issues.  A PR is ready.
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:30 AM, Kostas Kloudas <
> > k.klou...@data-artisans.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> The only thing that I want to add in the features to be added for
> > >> 1.3 is the NOT pattern for the CEP library.
> > >>

RE: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Radu Tudoran]

Sorry in case I missed something in the discussion of coming up with the list 
of open threads, but there is also 

[FLINK-6075] Support Order By for Stream SQL (Support Limit/Top(Sort) for 
Stream SQL)

...in case you want to consider it (it only needs a review)

Best regards,

-Original Message-
From: Robert Metzger [mailto:rmetz...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 10:43 AM
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

I've checked the release status again, and it seems that some more issues made 
it into master, while other very big new features are still being finished 
(incremental checkpointing, retractions, serializer upgrades and automatic 
buffer management).

I'll publish the first, non-voting, testing only RC0 on Monday morning.


Completed Features for 1.3
- TODO after feature freeze

Blockers:
12 blockers (4 documentation, 1 refcatoring) --> 8 real blockers (can be fixed 
after the feature freeze)


Really important (open):
- FLINK-6364: Implement incremental checkpointing in RocksDBStateBackend 
(pending PR)
- FLINK-6047: Add support for Retraction in Table API / SQL (depends on
FLINK-6093)
- FLINK-4545: Flink automatically manages TM network buffer (pending PR, under 
review)
- FLINK-6178: Allow upgrades to state serializers (pending PR, no review )


Mentioned in the thread (open):
- FLINK-6033: Support UNNEST query in the stream SQL API (no PR)
- FLINK-6335: Parse DISTINCT over grouped window in stream SQL (pending PR)
- FLINK-6373: Add runtime support for distinct aggregation over grouped windows 
(pending PR, under review)
- FLINK-6281: Create TableSink for JDBC (pending PR, under review)
- FLINK-6225: Support Row Stream for CassandraSink (pending PR, under
review)
- FLINK-6196: Support dynamic schema in Table Function (pending PR, under
review)
- FLINK-4022: Partition and topic discovery for FlinkKafkaConsumer (pending PR, 
no review)
- FLINK-4821: Implement rescalable non-partitioned state for Kinesis Connector 
(pending PR, under review)

Closed:
- FLINK-6377: Support map types in the Table / SQL API (merged)
- FLINK-6398: RowSerializer's duplicate should always return a new instance
(merged)
- FLINK-5998: Un-fat Hadoop from Flink fat jar (merged)
- FLINK-6337: Remove the buffer provider from PartitionRequestServerHandler
(merged)
- FLINK-5892: Recover job state at the granularity of operator (merged)
- FLINK-5906: Add support to register user defined aggregates in 
TableEnvironment (merged)
- FLINK-6334: Refactoring UDTF interface (merged)



On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
wrote:

> This is the list of blocking issues for Flink 1.3:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5740?jql=project
> %20%3D%20FLINK%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%
> 20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20priority%20%3D%
> 20Blocker%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.3.0 
> <https://issues.apache.org/jir 
> a/browse/FLINK-5740?jql=project%20=%20FLINK%20AND%20status%
> 20in%20(Open,%20%22In%20Progress%22,%20Reopened)%20AND%20priority%20=%
> 20Blocker%20AND%20fixVersion%20=%201.3.0>
>
> Could everyone please update the state of the issues mentioned in this 
> thread to “blocking” and set the version to “1.3.0” if they feel that 
> this is appropriate. Otherwise it is very hard for the release manager 
> to get an overview over the progress of the release. With an 
> up-to-date list it’s also possible to triage issues and discuss on the 
> issue whether it really should be a release blocker.
>
> Best,
> Aljoscha
> > On 2. May 2017, at 22:29, Eron Wright <eronwri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Robert, I'd like to see FLINK-5974
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5974> (Mesos DNS 
> > support) added to the list of important issues.  A PR is ready.
> >
> > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:30 AM, Kostas Kloudas <
> k.klou...@data-artisans.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The only thing that I want to add in the features to be added for 
> >> 1.3 is the NOT pattern for the CEP library.
> >>
> >> There is an open PR here: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3798 
> >> < https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3798>
> >> which is not far from getting in.
> >>
> >> Kostas
> >>
> >>> On May 2, 2017, at 12:10 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks a lot Ufuk for starting the discussion regarding the 1.3 
> >>> feature freeze.
> >>>
> >>> I didn't feature freeze yesterday (Monday) because it was a public
> >> holiday
> >>> here in Germany.
> >>>
> >>> I haven't made up my mind whether to do the feature freeze today 
> >>> or
> not.
> >>> Many

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Robert Metzger]

gt;>>>>>>> Ah, I see. The fix for that has been merged into master so it
> will
> >>>> be
> >>>>>>>>> release in Flink 1.3.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 13:50, Flavio Pompermaier <
> >>>> pomperma...@okkam.it>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the
> link
> >>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>> wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/
> >>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6398
> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> >>>>>>>> aljos...@apache.org>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue
> >> number
> >>>>>>>> 6389,
> >>>>>>>>>>> if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <
> >>>>>>> pomperma...@okkam.it>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also
> >>>>>>>>> FLINK-6398
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's
> not
> >> a
> >>>>>>> big
> >>>>>>>>>>> deal
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Flavio
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
> >>>>>>>>>>> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Devs,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the release plan.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support
> >>>>>>> dynamic
> >>>>>>>>>>> schema
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in Table Function?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr
> >> 30th.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Zhuoluo 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
> >>>>>>>>> following
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
> >>>>>>>>> FLINK-6373
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281,
> >> FLINK-6225
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so
> >>>> I'm
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but
> it
> >>>>>>>> depends
> >>>>>>>>>>> on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Haohui
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
> >>>>>>>> ches...@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing
> >>>>>>> completion,
> >>>>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it
> really
> >>>>>>>> short.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs,
> as
> >>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be
> >>>> good
> >>>>>>> i
> >>>>>>>>>>> think.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Chesnay
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics
> >>>>>>> reporter)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> into
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bowen
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337) to be included in 1.3 and most of the
> >>>>>>> jobs
> >>>>>>>>> can
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the
> >>>> help
> >>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> your
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> reviews this week.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -发件人：Ufuk
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org
> >主
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey devs! :-)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the
> >>>> upcoming
> >>>>>>>> 1.3
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the
> >>>>>>>> current
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> state of things.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> have not been merged yet?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> important feature?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want
> in
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the
> >> release
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> manager (@Robert?).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ufuk
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Aljoscha Krettek]

in 1.2 branch, but the next release will be
>>>>> 1.2.2
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Kurt
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Flavio:
>>>>>>> Have you seen this (w.r.t. 1.2.1) ?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://search-hadoop.com/m/Flink/VkLeQejxLg24Lk0D1?subj=+
>>>>>>> RESULT+VOTE+Release+Apache+Flink+1+2+1+RC2+
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Flavio Pompermaier <
>>>>> pomperma...@okkam.it>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Any chance to cherry-pick this also into 1.2.1? We're usign Flink
>>>> 1.2.0
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> production and maybe an upgrade to 1.2.1 would be a safer option in
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> short term..
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> Flavio
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <
>>>> aljos...@apache.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Ah, I see. The fix for that has been merged into master so it will
>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> release in Flink 1.3.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 13:50, Flavio Pompermaier <
>>>> pomperma...@okkam.it>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the link
>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/
>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6398
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
>>>>>>>> aljos...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue
>> number
>>>>>>>> 6389,
>>>>>>>>>>> if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <
>>>>>>> pomperma...@okkam.it>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also
>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6398
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not
>> a
>>>>>>> big
>>>>>>>>>>> deal
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Flavio
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
>>>>>>>>>>> zhuoluo....@alibaba-inc.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Devs,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the release plan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support
>>>>>>> dynamic
>>>>>>>>>>> schema
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Table Function?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr
>> 30th.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zhuoluo 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
>>>>>>>>> following
>>>>>>>>>>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6373
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281,
>> FLINK-6225
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so
>>>> I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it
>>>>>>>> depends
>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Haohui
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
>>>>>>>> ches...@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing
>>>>>>> completion,
>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really
>>>>>>>> short.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as
>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be
>>>> good
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>>>>> think.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chesnay
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics
>>>>>>> reporter)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bowen
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337) to be included in 1.3 and most of the
>>>>>>> jobs
>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the
>>>> help
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviews this week.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -发件人：Ufuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey devs! :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the
>>>> upcoming
>>>>>>>> 1.3
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the
>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>>>>> state of things.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have not been merged yet?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
>>>>>>>>>>>>> important feature?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the
>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>> manager (@Robert?).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ufuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Eron Wright]

t;>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 13:50, Flavio Pompermaier <
> >> pomperma...@okkam.it>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the link
> >> is
> >>>>>>>> wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/
> >>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6398
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> >>>>>> aljos...@apache.org>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue
> number
> >>>>>> 6389,
> >>>>>>>>> if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <
> >>>>> pomperma...@okkam.it>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also
> >>>>>>> FLINK-6398
> >>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not
> a
> >>>>> big
> >>>>>>>>> deal
> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>>> Flavio
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
> >>>>>>>>> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Devs,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the release plan.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
> >>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support
> >>>>> dynamic
> >>>>>>>>> schema
> >>>>>>>>>>> in Table Function?
> >>>>>>>>>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr
> 30th.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Zhuoluo 
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
> >>>>>>> following
> >>>>>>>>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
> >>>>>>> FLINK-6373
> >>>>>>>>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281,
> FLINK-6225
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so
> >> I'm
> >>>>>>>>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it
> >>>>>> depends
> >>>>>>>>> on
> >>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Haohui
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
> >>>>>> ches...@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing
> >>>>> completion,
> >>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really
> >>>>>> short.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as
> >> it
> >>>>>>>>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be
> >> good
> >>>>> i
> >>>>>>>>> think.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Chesnay
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics
> >>>>> reporter)
> >>>>>>>>>>> into
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Bowen
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> >>>>>>>>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
> >>>>>>>>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337) to be included in 1.3 and most of the
> >>>>> jobs
> >>>>>>> can
> >>>>>>>>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the
> >> help
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>> your
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> reviews this week.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> >>>>>>>>>>> -发件人：Ufuk
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> >>>>>>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> >>>>>>>>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hey devs! :-)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the
> >> upcoming
> >>>>>> 1.3
> >>>>>>>>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the
> >>>>>> current
> >>>>>>>>>>> state of things.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> >>>>>>>>>>> have not been merged yet?
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> >>>>>>>>>>> important feature?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the
> release
> >>>>>>>>>>> manager (@Robert?).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ufuk
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Kostas Kloudas]

gt;>>>>>>> deal
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>> Flavio
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
>>>>>>>>> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Devs,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the release plan.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support
>>>>> dynamic
>>>>>>>>> schema
>>>>>>>>>>> in Table Function?
>>>>>>>>>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
>>>>>>>>>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Zhuoluo 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
>>>>>>> following
>>>>>>>>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
>>>>>>>>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
>>>>>>> FLINK-6373
>>>>>>>>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
>>>>>>>>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so
>> I'm
>>>>>>>>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it
>>>>>> depends
>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Haohui
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
>>>>>> ches...@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing
>>>>> completion,
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really
>>>>>> short.
>>>>>>>>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as
>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be
>> good
>>>>> i
>>>>>>>>> think.
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Chesnay
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics
>>>>> reporter)
>>>>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Bowen
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
>>>>>>>>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
>>>>>>>>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337) to be included in 1.3 and most of the
>>>>> jobs
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the
>> help
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> reviews this week.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
>>>>>>>>>>> -发件人：Ufuk
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
>>>>>>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
>>>>>>>>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey devs! :-)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the
>> upcoming
>>>>>> 1.3
>>>>>>>>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the
>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>>> state of things.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
>>>>>>>>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
>>>>>>>>>>> have not been merged yet?
>>>>>>>>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
>>>>>>>>>>> important feature?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
>>>>>>>>>>> manager (@Robert?).
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Ufuk
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Robert Metzger]

; > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Zhuoluo 
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hello,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
> > >>>> following
> > >>>>>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> > >>>>>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
> > >>>> FLINK-6373
> > >>>>>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
> > >>>>>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so
> I'm
> > >>>>>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it
> > >>> depends
> > >>>>>> on
> > >>>>>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>>>>> Haohui
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
> > >>> ches...@apache.org
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hello,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing
> > >> completion,
> > >>>> but
> > >>>>>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really
> > >>> short.
> > >>>>>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as
> it
> > >>>>>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be
> good
> > >> i
> > >>>>>> think.
> > >>>>>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>>>>> Chesnay
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> > >>>>>>>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics
> > >> reporter)
> > >>>>>>>> into
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> > >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>> Bowen
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> > >>>>>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> > >>>>>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
> > >>>>>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337) to be included in 1.3 and most of the
> > >> jobs
> > >>>> can
> > >>>>>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the
> help
> > >>> of
> > >>>>>>>> your
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> reviews this week.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> > >>>>>>>> -发件人：Ufuk
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> > >>>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> > >>>>>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> > >>>>>>>> Hey devs! :-)
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the
> upcoming
> > >>> 1.3
> > >>>>>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the
> > >>> current
> > >>>>>>>> state of things.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> > >>>>>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> > >>>>>>>> have not been merged yet?
> > >>>>>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> > >>>>>>>> important feature?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in
> > >> the
> > >>>>>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> > >>>>>>>> manager (@Robert?).
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Best,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Ufuk
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Stephan Ewen]

 big
> >>>>>> deal
> >>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>> Flavio
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
> >>>>>> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Devs,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks for the release plan.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
> >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support
> >> dynamic
> >>>>>> schema
> >>>>>>>> in Table Function?
> >>>>>>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
> >>>>>>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Zhuoluo 
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
> >>>> following
> >>>>>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> >>>>>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
> >>>> FLINK-6373
> >>>>>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
> >>>>>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
> >>>>>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it
> >>> depends
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>> Haohui
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
> >>> ches...@apache.org
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing
> >> completion,
> >>>> but
> >>>>>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really
> >>> short.
> >>>>>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
> >>>>>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good
> >> i
> >>>>>> think.
> >>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>> Chesnay
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>>>>>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics
> >> reporter)
> >>>>>>>> into
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Bowen
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> >>>>>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>>>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
> >>>>>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337) to be included in 1.3 and most of the
> >> jobs
> >>>> can
> >>>>>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help
> >>> of
> >>>>>>>> your
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> reviews this week.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> >>>>>>>> -发件人：Ufuk
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> >>>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> >>>>>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> >>>>>>>> Hey devs! :-)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming
> >>> 1.3
> >>>>>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the
> >>> current
> >>>>>>>> state of things.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> >>>>>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> >>>>>>>> have not been merged yet?
> >>>>>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> >>>>>>>> important feature?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in
> >> the
> >>>>>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> >>>>>>>> manager (@Robert?).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Ufuk
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai]

;>>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the  
>>>> following  
>>>>>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377  
>>>>>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,  
>>>> FLINK-6373  
>>>>>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225  
>>>>>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm  
>>>>>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it  
>>> depends  
>>>>>> on  
>>>>>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Regards,  
>>>>>>>> Haohui  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <  
>>> ches...@apache.org  
>>>>>>>> wrote:  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Hello,  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing  
>> completion,  
>>>> but  
>>>>>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really  
>>> short.  
>>>>>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it  
>>>>>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good  
>> i  
>>>>>> think.  
>>>>>>>> Regards,  
>>>>>>>> Chesnay  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,  
>>>>>>>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics  
>> reporter)  
>>>>>>>> into  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in  
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Thanks,  
>>>>>>>> Bowen  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <  
>>>>>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Hi Ufuk,  
>>>>>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!  
>>>>>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337) to be included in 1.3 and most of the  
>> jobs  
>>>> can  
>>>>>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help  
>>> of  
>>>>>>>> your  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> reviews this week.  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-  
>>>>>>>> -发件人：Ufuk  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <  
>>>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主  
>>>>>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze  
>>>>>>>> Hey devs! :-)  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming  
>>> 1.3  
>>>>>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the  
>>> current  
>>>>>>>> state of things.  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)  
>>>>>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that  
>>>>>>>> have not been merged yet?  
>>>>>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an  
>>>>>>>> important feature?  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in  
>> the  
>>>>>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release  
>>>>>>>> manager (@Robert?).  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Best,  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Ufuk  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Chesnay Schepler]

FLINK-5892 has been merged.

For FLINK-4545 (replacing numNetworkBuffer parameter) a PR is also still 
open and could use a second pair of eyes.


On 28.04.2017 17:03, Kurt Young wrote:

Hi Flavio,

I have also fix the issue in 1.2 branch, but the next release will be 1.2.2

Best,
Kurt

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:


Flavio:
Have you seen this (w.r.t. 1.2.1) ?

http://search-hadoop.com/m/Flink/VkLeQejxLg24Lk0D1?subj=+
RESULT+VOTE+Release+Apache+Flink+1+2+1+RC2+

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
wrote:


Any chance to cherry-pick this also into 1.2.1? We're usign Flink 1.2.0

in

production and maybe an upgrade to 1.2.1 would be a safer option in the
short term..

Best,
Flavio

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
wrote:


Ah, I see. The fix for that has been merged into master so it will be
release in Flink 1.3.


On 28. Apr 2017, at 13:50, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>

wrote:

Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the link is
wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/

jira/browse/FLINK-6398

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <

aljos...@apache.org>

wrote:


I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue number

6389,

if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.


On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <

pomperma...@okkam.it>

wrote:

If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also

FLINK-6398

<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not a

big

deal

Best,
Flavio

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <

zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>

wrote:


Hi Devs,

Thanks for the release plan.

Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support

dynamic

schema

in Table Function?
I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.


Thanks,

Zhuoluo 





在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：

Hello,

Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the

following

features available in Flink 1.3:

* Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
* Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,

FLINK-6373

* StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
* Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998

All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.

Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it

depends

on

FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.

Regards,
Haohui

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <

ches...@apache.org

wrote:

Hello,

FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing

completion,

but

with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really

short.

Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good

i

think.

Regards,
Chesnay

On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:

Hi Ufuk,
I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics

reporter)

into

release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736

Thanks,
Bowen

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:

Hi Ufuk,
Thank you for launching this topic!
I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (

https://issues.apache.org/

jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the

jobs

can

get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help

of

your

reviews this week.

Cheers,Zhijiang-
-发件人：Ufuk

Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
Hey devs! :-)

We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming

1.3

release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.

I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the

current

state of things.

- Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
- Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
have not been merged yet?
- Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
important feature?

Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in

the

1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
manager (@Robert?).

Best,

Ufuk

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Kurt Young]

gt;>
> > > >>>> Hello,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing
> completion,
> > > but
> > > >>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really
> > short.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
> > > >>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good
> i
> > > >> think.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Regards,
> > > >>>> Chesnay
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Hi Ufuk,
> > > >>>>I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics
> reporter)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> into
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>> Bowen
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> > > >>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Hi Ufuk,
> > > >>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
> > > >>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the
> jobs
> > > can
> > > >>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help
> > of
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> your
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> reviews this week.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> > > >>>> -发件人：Ufuk
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> > > >>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> > > >>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> > > >>>> Hey devs! :-)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming
> > 1.3
> > > >>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the
> > current
> > > >>>> state of things.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> > > >>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> > > >>>> have not been merged yet?
> > > >>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> > > >>>> important feature?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in
> the
> > > >>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> > > >>>> manager (@Robert?).
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Best,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Ufuk
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Ted Yu]

Flavio:
Have you seen this (w.r.t. 1.2.1) ?

http://search-hadoop.com/m/Flink/VkLeQejxLg24Lk0D1?subj=+RESULT+VOTE+Release+Apache+Flink+1+2+1+RC2+

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
wrote:

> Any chance to cherry-pick this also into 1.2.1? We're usign Flink 1.2.0 in
> production and maybe an upgrade to 1.2.1 would be a safer option in the
> short term..
>
> Best,
> Flavio
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Ah, I see. The fix for that has been merged into master so it will be
> > release in Flink 1.3.
> >
> > > On 28. Apr 2017, at 13:50, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the link is
> > > wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/
> > jira/browse/FLINK-6398
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> aljos...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue number
> 6389,
> > >> if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.
> > >>
> > >>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also
> > FLINK-6398
> > >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not a big
> > >> deal
> > >>>
> > >>> Best,
> > >>> Flavio
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
> > >> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi Devs,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks for the release plan.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
> > >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support dynamic
> > >> schema
> > >>>> in Table Function?
> > >>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
> > >>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Zhuoluo 
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hello,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
> > following
> > >>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> > >>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
> > FLINK-6373
> > >>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
> > >>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> > >>>>
> > >>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
> > >>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it
> depends
> > >> on
> > >>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Regards,
> > >>>> Haohui
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
> ches...@apache.org
> > >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hello,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion,
> > but
> > >>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really
> short.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
> > >>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i
> > >> think.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Regards,
> > >>>> Chesnay
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wr

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Flavio Pompermaier]

Any chance to cherry-pick this also into 1.2.1? We're usign Flink 1.2.0 in
production and maybe an upgrade to 1.2.1 would be a safer option in the
short term..

Best,
Flavio

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
wrote:

> Ah, I see. The fix for that has been merged into master so it will be
> release in Flink 1.3.
>
> > On 28. Apr 2017, at 13:50, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the link is
> > wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/FLINK-6398
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue number 6389,
> >> if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.
> >>
> >>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also
> FLINK-6398
> >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not a big
> >> deal
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Flavio
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
> >> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Devs,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for the release plan.
> >>>>
> >>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
> >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support dynamic
> >> schema
> >>>> in Table Function?
> >>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
> >>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Zhuoluo 
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the
> following
> >>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
> >>>>
> >>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> >>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335,
> FLINK-6373
> >>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
> >>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> >>>>
> >>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
> >>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> >>>>
> >>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it depends
> >> on
> >>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Haohui
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion,
> but
> >>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
> >>>>
> >>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
> >>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i
> >> think.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Chesnay
> >>>>
> >>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>>I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter)
> >>>>
> >>>> into
> >>>>
> >>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Bowen
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> >>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Ufuk,
> >>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
> >>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> >>>>
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/
> >>>>
> >>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs
> can
> >>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of
> >>>>
> >>>> your
> >>>>
> >>>> reviews this week.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> >>>> -发件人：Ufuk
> >>>>
> >>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> >>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> >>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> >>>> Hey devs! :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> >>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> >>>>
> >>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> >>>> state of things.
> >>>>
> >>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> >>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> >>>> have not been merged yet?
> >>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> >>>> important feature?
> >>>>
> >>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> >>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> >>>> manager (@Robert?).
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Ufuk
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Aljoscha Krettek]

Ah, I see. The fix for that has been merged into master so it will be release 
in Flink 1.3.

> On 28. Apr 2017, at 13:50, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it> wrote:
> 
> Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the link is
> wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6398
> 
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue number 6389,
>> if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.
>> 
>>> On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also FLINK-6398
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not a big
>> deal
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Flavio
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
>> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Devs,
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the release plan.
>>>> 
>>>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support dynamic
>> schema
>>>> in Table Function?
>>>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
>>>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> Zhuoluo 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
>>>> 
>>>> Hello,
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the following
>>>> features available in Flink 1.3:
>>>> 
>>>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
>>>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335, FLINK-6373
>>>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
>>>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
>>>> 
>>>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
>>>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
>>>> 
>>>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it depends
>> on
>>>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Haohui
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello,
>>>> 
>>>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but
>>>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
>>>> 
>>>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
>>>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i
>> think.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Chesnay
>>>> 
>>>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>>I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter)
>>>> 
>>>> into
>>>> 
>>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Bowen
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
>>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
>>>> 
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/
>>>> 
>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of
>>>> 
>>>> your
>>>> 
>>>> reviews this week.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
>>>> -发件人：Ufuk
>>>> 
>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
>>>> Hey devs! :-)
>>>> 
>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>>>> 
>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
>>>> state of things.
>>>> 
>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
>>>> have not been merged yet?
>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
>>>> important feature?
>>>> 
>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
>>>> manager (@Robert?).
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> Ufuk
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Flavio Pompermaier]

Sorry, you're right Aljosha..the issue number is correct, the link is
wrong! The correct one is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6398

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
wrote:

> I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue number 6389,
> if I’m not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.
>
> > On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
> wrote:
> >
> > If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also FLINK-6398
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not a big
> deal
> >
> > Best,
> > Flavio
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <
> zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Devs,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the release plan.
> >>
> >> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support dynamic
> schema
> >> in Table Function?
> >> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
> >> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Zhuoluo 
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the following
> >> features available in Flink 1.3:
> >>
> >> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> >> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335, FLINK-6373
> >> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
> >> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> >>
> >> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
> >> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> >>
> >> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it depends
> on
> >> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Haohui
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but
> >> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
> >>
> >> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
> >> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i
> think.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Chesnay
> >>
> >> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Ufuk,
> >> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter)
> >>
> >> into
> >>
> >> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> >> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Bowen
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> >> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Ufuk,
> >> Thank you for launching this topic!
> >> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/
> >>
> >> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
> >> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of
> >>
> >> your
> >>
> >> reviews this week.
> >>
> >> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> >> -发件人：Ufuk
> >>
> >> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> >> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> >> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> >> Hey devs! :-)
> >>
> >> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> >> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> >>
> >> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> >> state of things.
> >>
> >> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> >> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> >> have not been merged yet?
> >> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> >> important feature?
> >>
> >> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> >> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> >> manager (@Robert?).
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Ufuk
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Aljoscha Krettek]

I think there might be a typo. We haven’t yet reached issue number 6389, if I’m 
not mistaken. The latest as I’m writing this is 6410.

> On 28. Apr 2017, at 10:00, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it> wrote:
> 
> If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also FLINK-6398
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not a big deal
> 
> Best,
> Flavio
> 
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Devs,
>> 
>> Thanks for the release plan.
>> 
>> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support dynamic schema
>> in Table Function?
>> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
>> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Zhuoluo 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the following
>> features available in Flink 1.3:
>> 
>> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
>> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335, FLINK-6373
>> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
>> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
>> 
>> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
>> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
>> 
>> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it depends on
>> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Haohui
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but
>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
>> 
>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i think.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Chesnay
>> 
>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Ufuk,
>> I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter)
>> 
>> into
>> 
>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Bowen
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Ufuk,
>> Thank you for launching this topic!
>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
>> 
>> https://issues.apache.org/
>> 
>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of
>> 
>> your
>> 
>> reviews this week.
>> 
>> Cheers,Zhijiang-
>> -发件人：Ufuk
>> 
>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
>> Hey devs! :-)
>> 
>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>> 
>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
>> state of things.
>> 
>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
>> have not been merged yet?
>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
>> important feature?
>> 
>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
>> manager (@Robert?).
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Ufuk
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Flavio Pompermaier]

If it's not a problem it will be great for us to include also FLINK-6398
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6938> if it's not a big deal

Best,
Flavio

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Zhuoluo Yang <zhuoluo@alibaba-inc.com>
wrote:

> Hi Devs,
>
> Thanks for the release plan.
>
> Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support dynamic schema
> in Table Function?
> I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
> I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Zhuoluo 
>
>
>
>
>
> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
>
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the following
> features available in Flink 1.3:
>
> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335, FLINK-6373
> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
>
> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
>
> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it depends on
> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
>
> Regards,
> Haohui
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but
> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
>
> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i think.
>
> Regards,
> Chesnay
>
> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
>
> Hi Ufuk,
>  I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter)
>
> into
>
> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
>
> Thanks,
> Bowen
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ufuk,
> Thank you for launching this topic!
> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
>
> https://issues.apache.org/
>
> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of
>
> your
>
> reviews this week.
>
> Cheers,Zhijiang-
> -发件人：Ufuk
>
> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> Hey devs! :-)
>
> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>
> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> state of things.
>
> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> have not been merged yet?
> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> important feature?
>
> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> manager (@Robert?).
>
> Best,
>
> Ufuk
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Zhuoluo Yang]

Hi Devs,

Thanks for the release plan.

Could you also please add the feature FLINK-6196 
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6196> Support dynamic schema in 
Table Function?
I’d like to update the code as comments left on PR today.
I will try to make sure the code is updated before the Apr 30th.


Thanks,

Zhuoluo 





> 在 2017年4月28日，上午8:48，Haohui Mai <ricet...@gmail.com> 写道：
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the following
> features available in Flink 1.3:
> 
> * Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
> * Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335, FLINK-6373
> * StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
> * Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998
> 
> All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
> optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.
> 
> Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it depends on
> FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.
> 
> Regards,
> Haohui
> 
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but
>> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
>> 
>> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
>> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i think.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Chesnay
>> 
>> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>  I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter)
>> into
>>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bowen
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
>>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
>>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
>> https://issues.apache.org/
>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
>>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of
>> your
>>>> reviews this week.
>>>> 
>> Cheers,Zhijiang--发件人：Ufuk
>>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
>>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
>>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
>>>> Hey devs! :-)
>>>> 
>>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
>>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>>>> 
>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
>>>> state of things.
>>>> 
>>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
>>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
>>>> have not been merged yet?
>>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
>>>> important feature?
>>>> 
>>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
>>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
>>>> manager (@Robert?).
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> Ufuk
>>>> 
>> 
>> 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Haohui Mai]

Hello,

Thanks for starting this thread. It would be great to see the following
features available in Flink 1.3:

* Support for complex schema: FLINK-6033, FLINK-6377
* Various improvements on SQL over group windows: FLINK-6335, FLINK-6373
* StreamTableSink for JDBC and Cassandra: FLINK-6281, FLINK-6225
* Decoupling Flink and Hadoop: FLINK-5998

All of them have gone through at least one round of review so I'm
optimistic that they can make it to 1.3 in a day or two.

Additionally it would be great to see FLINK-6232 go in, but it depends on
FLINK-5884 so it might be a little bit tough.

Regards,
Haohui

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but
> with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
>
> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it
> allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i think.
>
> Regards,
> Chesnay
>
> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
> > Hi Ufuk,
> >   I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter)
> into
> > release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
> > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bowen
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
> > wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Ufuk,
> >> Thank you for launching this topic!
> >> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (
> https://issues.apache.org/
> >> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
> >> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of
> your
> >> reviews this week.
> >>
> Cheers,Zhijiang--------------发件人：Ufuk
> >> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> >> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> >> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> >> Hey devs! :-)
> >>
> >> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> >> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> >>
> >> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> >> state of things.
> >>
> >> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> >> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> >> have not been merged yet?
> >> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> >> important feature?
> >>
> >> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> >> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> >> manager (@Robert?).
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Ufuk
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[施晓罡]

Hi Ufuk

Incremental checkpointing can significantly improve the performance of 
checkpointing.
I hope it can be included in release 1.3.

I am working with Stefan on the last subtask, which attempts to implement 
incremental checkpointing in RocksDB state backend (FLINK-6364). 
Without future optimizations, the work is near completion. So i think 2-3 more 
days would be good.

Regards
Xiaogang

> 在 2017年4月28日，上午3:22，Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> 写道：
> 
> Hello,
> 
> FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but with 
> only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.
> 
> Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it allows the 
> modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i think.
> 
> Regards,
> Chesnay
> 
> On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:
>> Hi Ufuk,
>>  I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter) into
>> release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Bowen
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
>> wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Ufuk,
>>> Thank you for launching this topic!
>>> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (https://issues.apache.org/
>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
>>> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of your
>>> reviews this week.
>>> Cheers,Zhijiang--------------发件人：Ufuk
>>> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
>>> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
>>> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
>>> Hey devs! :-)
>>> 
>>> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
>>> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>>> 
>>> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
>>> state of things.
>>> 
>>> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
>>> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
>>> have not been merged yet?
>>> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
>>> important feature?
>>> 
>>> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
>>> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
>>> manager (@Robert?).
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Ufuk
>>> 
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Chesnay Schepler]

Hello,

FLINK-5892 (Restoring state by operator) is also nearing completion, but 
with only 1 day left before the weekend we're cutting it really short.


Since this eliminates a major pain point when updating jobs, as it 
allows the modification of chains, another day or 2 would be good i think.


Regards,
Chesnay

On 27.04.2017 18:55, Bowen Li wrote:

Hi Ufuk,
  I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter) into
release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736

Thanks,
Bowen

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:


Hi Ufuk,
Thank you for launching this topic!
I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (https://issues.apache.org/
jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of your
reviews this week.
Cheers,Zhijiang--发件人：Ufuk
Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
Hey devs! :-)

We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.

I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
state of things.

- Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
- Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
have not been merged yet?
- Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
important feature?

Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
manager (@Robert?).

Best,

Ufuk

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Bowen Li]

Hi Ufuk,
 I'd like to get FLINK-6013 (Adding Datadog Http metrics reporter) into
release 1.3. It's in the final state of code review in
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3736

Thanks,
Bowen

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <
wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com> wrote:

> Hi Ufuk,
> Thank you for launching this topic!
> I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider (https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and most of the jobs can
> get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with the help of your
> reviews this week.
> Cheers,Zhijiang--发件人：Ufuk
> Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev <
> dev@flink.apache.org>抄 送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主
> 题：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze
> Hey devs! :-)
>
> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>
> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> state of things.
>
> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that
> have not been merged yet?
> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an
> important feature?
>
> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> manager (@Robert?).
>
> Best,
>
> Ufuk
>

回复：[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999)]

Hi Ufuk,
Thank you for launching this topic!
I wish my latest refinement of buffer provider 
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6337)  to be included in 1.3 and 
most of the jobs can get benefit from it. And I think it can be completed with 
the help of your reviews this week.
Cheers,Zhijiang--发件人：Ufuk
 Celebi <u...@apache.org>发送时间：2017年4月27日(星期四) 22:25收件人：dev 
<dev@flink.apache.org>抄　送：Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>主　题：[DISCUSS] 
Feature Freeze
Hey devs! :-)

We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.

I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
state of things.

- Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
- Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that have not been merged yet?
- Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an important feature?

Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
manager (@Robert?).

Best,

Ufuk

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Fabian Hueske]

Hi everybody,

from an Table API / SQL point of view, three major features are not
completed yet:
- user-defined aggregation functions: Most of the preparation work is done.
There is one PR missing to actually register and analyze UDAGGs.
- retraction support: This feature was developed in a feature branch
(table-retraction) and is almost complete as well. There is one PR missing
for the conversion of Tables to DataStreams.
- time indicators: Timo is working on this feature and AFAIK, close to
finish it.

I know that the contributors for the UDAGG and retraction support are
working on their last PRs right now.

So, from the Table API / SQL point of view, we are very! close to finish
our efforts.
A few days more time before the feature freeze would help to ensure that
the Table API / SQL makes a huge step forward with Flink 1.3.

Cheers, Fabian


2017-04-27 16:44 GMT+02:00 Henry Saputra :

> The FLINK-6364  seems
> need an accompanying FLIP [1] to help review.
>
> I dont see for this one in the list of existing proposals.
>
> - Henry
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/
> Flink+Improvement+Proposals
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Gyula Fóra  wrote:
>
> > Hi Ufuk,
> >
> > Thanks for starting this discussion!
> >
> > One feature that immediately comes to my mind is incremental
> checkpointing
> > given it's production impact.
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6364
> >
> > It would be good to get some better understanding how the implementation
> > effort is going and whether it is reasonable to expect this to be
> included
> > in 1.3.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Gyula
> >
> > Ufuk Celebi  ezt írta (időpont: 2017. ápr. 27., Cs,
> > 16:24):
> >
> > > Hey devs! :-)
> > >
> > > We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> > > release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> > >
> > > I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> > > state of things.
> > >
> > > - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> > > - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that have not been merged
> > > yet?
> > > - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an important
> > feature?
> > >
> > > Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> > > 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> > > manager (@Robert?).
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Ufuk
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Shaoxuan Wang]

Hi Ufuk,
Thanks for the heads-up.

In terms of table API and SQL, I am hoping we can get the following
features (which have not completed merged yet) included in 1.3:

1. UDAGG (FLINK-5564),  I am working on the last PR (FLINK-5906) to close
this feature.
2. Retract (FLINK-6047), we are planning to merge retract feature-branch to
master-branch after FLINK-6093 is merged.
3. Refactor UDTF interface(FLINK-6334), we are planning to open the PR
today.

I feel we are very close to complete the above features (thanks for all the
reviews from Fabian and Timo). So It would be great if we can extend a few
days to freeze the 1.3.

Thanks,
Shaoxuan


On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:24 PM, Ufuk Celebi  wrote:

> Hey devs! :-)
>
> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>
> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> state of things.
>
> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that have not been merged
> yet?
> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an important feature?
>
> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> manager (@Robert?).
>
> Best,
>
> Ufuk
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Henry Saputra]

The FLINK-6364  seems
need an accompanying FLIP [1] to help review.

I dont see for this one in the list of existing proposals.

- Henry

[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Gyula Fóra  wrote:

> Hi Ufuk,
>
> Thanks for starting this discussion!
>
> One feature that immediately comes to my mind is incremental checkpointing
> given it's production impact.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6364
>
> It would be good to get some better understanding how the implementation
> effort is going and whether it is reasonable to expect this to be included
> in 1.3.
>
> Regards,
> Gyula
>
> Ufuk Celebi  ezt írta (időpont: 2017. ápr. 27., Cs,
> 16:24):
>
> > Hey devs! :-)
> >
> > We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> > release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
> >
> > I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> > state of things.
> >
> > - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> > - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that have not been merged
> > yet?
> > - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an important
> feature?
> >
> > Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> > 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> > manager (@Robert?).
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Ufuk
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Gyula Fóra]

Hi Ufuk,

Thanks for starting this discussion!

One feature that immediately comes to my mind is incremental checkpointing
given it's production impact.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6364

It would be good to get some better understanding how the implementation
effort is going and whether it is reasonable to expect this to be included
in 1.3.

Regards,
Gyula

Ufuk Celebi  ezt írta (időpont: 2017. ápr. 27., Cs, 16:24):

> Hey devs! :-)
>
> We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
> release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.
>
> I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
> state of things.
>
> - Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
> - Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that have not been merged
> yet?
> - Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an important feature?
>
> Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
> 1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
> manager (@Robert?).
>
> Best,
>
> Ufuk
>

[DISCUSS] Feature Freeze

[Ufuk Celebi]

Hey devs! :-)

We decided to follow a time-based release model with the upcoming 1.3
release and the planned feature freeze is on Monday, May 1st.

I wanted to start a discussion to get a quick overview of the current
state of things.

- Is everyone on track and aware of the feature freeze? ;)
- Are there any major features we want in 1.3 that have not been merged yet?
- Do we need to extend the feature freeze, because of an important feature?

Would be great to gather a list of features/PRs that we want in the
1.3 release. This could be a good starting point for the release
manager (@Robert?).

Best,

Ufuk