OSDir


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] Dropping flink-storm?


+1 to drop it.

Thanks, Fabian

Am Sa., 29. Sep. 2018 um 12:05 Uhr schrieb Niels Basjes <niels@xxxxxxx>:

>  I would drop it.
>
> Niels Basjes
>
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, 10:38 Kostas Kloudas, <k.kloudas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 to drop it as nobody seems to be willing to maintain it and it also
> > stands in the way for future developments in Flink.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Kostas
> >
> > > On Sep 29, 2018, at 8:19 AM, Tzu-Li Chen <wander4096@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 to drop it.
> > >
> > > It seems few people use it. Commits history of an experimental
> > > module sparse often means that there is low interest.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > >
> > > 远远 <zhao137578346@xxxxxxxxx> 于2018年9月29日周六 下午2:16写道:
> > >
> > >> +1, it‘s time to drop it😂
> > >>
> > >> Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <wangzhijiang999@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2018年9月29日周六
> > >> 下午1:53写道:
> > >>
> > >>> Very agree with to drop it. +1
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>> 发件人:Jeff Carter <jpcarterara@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >>> 发送时间:2018年9月29日(星期六) 10:18
> > >>> 收件人:dev <dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>> 抄 送:chesnay <chesnay@xxxxxxxxxx>; Till Rohrmann <
> trohrmann@xxxxxxxxxx
> > >;
> > >>> user <user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>> 主 题:Re: [DISCUSS] Dropping flink-storm?
> > >>>
> > >>> +1 to drop it.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 7:25 PM Hequn Cheng <chenghequn@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +1 to drop it. It seems that few people use it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Best, Hequn
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <
> chesnay@xxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I'm very much in favor of dropping it.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Flink has been continually growing in terms of features, and IMO
> > we've
> > >>>>> reached the point where we should cull some of the more obscure
> ones.
> > >>>
> > >>>>> flink-storm, while interesting from a theoretical standpoint,
> offers
> > too
> > >>>>> little value.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>> Note that the bolt/spout wrapper parts of the part are still
> > compatible,
> > >>>>> it's only topologies that aren't working.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> IMO compatibility layers only add value if they ease the migration
> to
> > >>>>> Flink APIs.
> > >>>
> > >>>>> * bolt/spout wrappers do this, but they will continue to work even
> > if we
> > >>>>> drop it
> > >>>>> * topologies don't do this, so I'm not interested in then.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 28.09.2018 15:22, Till Rohrmann wrote:
> > >>>>>> Hi everyone,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I would like to discuss how to proceed with Flink's storm
> > >>>>>> compatibility layer flink-strom.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> While working on removing Flink's legacy mode, I noticed that some
> > >>>
> > >>>>>> parts of flink-storm rely on the legacy Flink client. In fact, at
> > the
> > >>>
> > >>>>>> moment flink-storm does not work together with Flink's new
> > distributed
> > >>>>>> architecture.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'm also wondering how many people are actually using Flink's
> Storm
> > >>>>>> compatibility layer and whether it would be worth porting it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I see two options how to proceed:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 1) Commit to maintain flink-storm and port it to Flink's new
> > >>>> architecture
> > >>>>>> 2) Drop flink-storm
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>> I doubt that we can contribute it to Apache Bahir [1], because
> once
> > we
> > >>>
> > >>>>>> remove the legacy mode, this module will no longer work with all
> > newer
> > >>>>>> Flink versions.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>> Therefore, I would like to hear your opinion on this and in
> > particular
> > >>>>>> if you are using or planning to use flink-storm in the future.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/bahir-flink
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>> Till
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> >
>