Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Feature]: Upgrading Flink version based on Mixed-format table #1983

Closed
2 of 4 tasks
Tracked by #1998 ...
YesOrNo828 opened this issue Sep 17, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2001
Closed
2 of 4 tasks
Tracked by #1998 ...

[Feature]: Upgrading Flink version based on Mixed-format table #1983

YesOrNo828 opened this issue Sep 17, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2001
Labels
type:feature Feature Requests

Comments

@YesOrNo828
Copy link
Contributor

YesOrNo828 commented Sep 17, 2023

Description

In terms of Disscussion-1937, we conclude that flink modules will extract the public modules to support different versions of the Flink, and will only keep the three latest flink versions in the future, which will greatly reduce maintenance costs and make UTs easier!

The code of the flink public modules will depend on the latest flink version, e.g. 1.17 now, and any conflicts between api's of different Flink versions will be resolved in other versions.

/flink
|---/v1.15
|------/flink #fix the confict with 1.17 API
|------/flink-runtime #shaded
|---/v1.16
|------/flink #fix the confict with 1.17 API
|------/flink-runtime #shaded
|---/v1.17
|------/flink
|------/flink-runtime #shaded
|---/flink-common #dependence the newest flink version 1.17
|---/flink-common-format #dependence the newest flink version 1.17

Use case/motivation

No response

Describe the solution

  • Support Flink 1.17 based on the Flink common module
  • Support Flink 1.16 based on the Flink common module
  • Remove Flink 1.12
  • Remove Flink 1.14
  • Adjust Flink 1.15 based on the Flink common module

Subtasks

No response

No response

Are you willing to submit a PR?

  • Yes I am willing to submit a PR!

Code of Conduct

@YesOrNo828 YesOrNo828 added the type:feature Feature Requests label Sep 17, 2023
@czy006
Copy link
Contributor

czy006 commented Sep 17, 2023

After offline synchronization, our common module determined to use 1.17 code, and tried to make the 1.15 code compatible with 1.17. I am willing to take on this part of the work. @YesOrNo828

@YesOrNo828
Copy link
Contributor Author

@czy006 could you create a subtask issue related to #1983 to support 1.17?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type:feature Feature Requests
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants