[DISCUSS] Creating last bug fix release for 1.5 branch

[Till Rohrmann]

Dear community,

I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should release a last
bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.

Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to support the
1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the current
release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes address
serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing
retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for our users
if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last 1.5.6
release. What do you think?

Cheers,
Till

[vino yang]

Hi Till,

I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially some
serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
Consider that some companies' production environments are more cautious
about upgrading large versions.
I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.

Best,
Vino

Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：

> Dear community,
>
> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should release a last
> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
>
> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to support the
> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the current
> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes address
> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing
> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for our users
> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last 1.5.6
> release. What do you think?
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>

[qi luo]

Hi Till,

Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink major versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major version too quickly, it may be a concern for companies.

Best,
Qi

> On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Till,
>
> I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially some
> serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
> Consider that some companies' production environments are more cautious
> about upgrading large versions.
> I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
>
> Best,
> Vino
>
> Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
>
>> Dear community,
>>
>> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should release a last
>> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
>>
>> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to support the
>> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the current
>> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes address
>> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing
>> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
>> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for our users
>> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last 1.5.6
>> release. What do you think?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>>

[Ufuk Celebi-2]

+1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
manageable.

@Vino: I agree with your assessment.

@Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.

Best,

Ufuk

On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi Till,
>
> Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink major versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major version too quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
>
> Best,
> Qi
>
> > On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Till,
> >
> > I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially some
> > serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
> > Consider that some companies' production environments are more cautious
> > about upgrading large versions.
> > I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
> >
> > Best,
> > Vino
> >
> > Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
> >
> >> Dear community,
> >>
> >> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should release a last
> >> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
> >>
> >> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to support the
> >> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the current
> >> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes address
> >> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing
> >> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
> >> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for our users
> >> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last 1.5.6
> >> release. What do you think?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Till
> >>
>

[Jeff Zhang]

+1, I think very few people would use 1.6 or 1.7 in their production in
near future, so I expect they would use 1.5 in production for a long
period，it makes sense to provide a stable version for production usage.

Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月9日周日 下午6:07写道：

> +1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
> also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
> manageable.
>
> @Vino: I agree with your assessment.
>
> @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
> the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.
>
> Best,
>
> Ufuk
>
> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Till,
> >
> > Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be
> supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink major
> versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major version too
> quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
> >
> > Best,
> > Qi
> >
> > > On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Till,
> > >
> > > I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially some
> > > serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
> > > Consider that some companies' production environments are more cautious
> > > about upgrading large versions.
> > > I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Vino
> > >
> > > Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
> > >
> > >> Dear community,
> > >>
> > >> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should release a
> last
> > >> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
> > >>
> > >> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to support
> the
> > >> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the
> current
> > >> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes
> address
> > >> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing
> > >> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
> > >> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for our
> users
> > >> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last 1.5.6
> > >> release. What do you think?
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Till
> > >>
> >
>

--
Best Regards

Jeff Zhang

[jincheng sun]

+1. There are incompatible improvements between 1.5.x and 1.6/1.7, so many
1.5.x users may not be willing to upgrade to 1.6 or 1.7 due to migration
costs, so it makes sense to creating last bug fix release for 1.5 branch.

Bests,
Jincheng

Jeff Zhang <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月10日周一 上午9:24写道：

> +1, I think very few people would use 1.6 or 1.7 in their production in
> near future, so I expect they would use 1.5 in production for a long
> period，it makes sense to provide a stable version for production usage.
>
> Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月9日周日 下午6:07写道：
>
> > +1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
> > also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
> > manageable.
> >
> > @Vino: I agree with your assessment.
> >
> > @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
> > the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Ufuk
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Till,
> > >
> > > Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be
> > supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink major
> > versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major version
> too
> > quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Qi
> > >
> > > > On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Till,
> > > >
> > > > I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially some
> > > > serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
> > > > Consider that some companies' production environments are more
> cautious
> > > > about upgrading large versions.
> > > > I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Vino
> > > >
> > > > Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
> > > >
> > > >> Dear community,
> > > >>
> > > >> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should release a
> > last
> > > >> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
> > > >>
> > > >> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to support
> > the
> > > >> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the
> > current
> > > >> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes
> > address
> > > >> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing
> > > >> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
> > > >> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for
> our
> > users
> > > >> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last
> 1.5.6
> > > >> release. What do you think?
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Till
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
>
> Jeff Zhang
>

[Till Rohrmann]

Thanks for the feedback! I conclude that the community is in favour of a
last 1.5.6 release. I'll try to make the arrangements in the next two weeks.

Cheers,
Till

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 2:40 AM jincheng sun <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> +1. There are incompatible improvements between 1.5.x and 1.6/1.7, so many
> 1.5.x users may not be willing to upgrade to 1.6 or 1.7 due to migration
> costs, so it makes sense to creating last bug fix release for 1.5 branch.
>
> Bests,
> Jincheng
>
> Jeff Zhang <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月10日周一 上午9:24写道：
>
> > +1, I think very few people would use 1.6 or 1.7 in their production in
> > near future, so I expect they would use 1.5 in production for a long
> > period，it makes sense to provide a stable version for production usage.
> >
> > Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月9日周日 下午6:07写道：
> >
> > > +1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
> > > also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
> > > manageable.
> > >
> > > @Vino: I agree with your assessment.
> > >
> > > @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
> > > the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Ufuk
> > >
> > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Till,
> > > >
> > > > Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be
> > > supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink major
> > > versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major version
> > too
> > > quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Qi
> > > >
> > > > > On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Till,
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially
> some
> > > > > serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
> > > > > Consider that some companies' production environments are more
> > cautious
> > > > > about upgrading large versions.
> > > > > I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Vino
> > > > >
> > > > > Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
> > > > >
> > > > >> Dear community,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should
> release a
> > > last
> > > > >> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to
> support
> > > the
> > > > >> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the
> > > current
> > > > >> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the fixes
> > > address
> > > > >> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693), fixing
> > > > >> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
> > > > >> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice for
> > our
> > > users
> > > > >> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last
> > 1.5.6
> > > > >> release. What do you think?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > >> Till
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Jeff Zhang
> >
>

[Thomas Weise]

Thanks Till and my belated +1 for a final patch release :)

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:47 AM Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback! I conclude that the community is in favour of a
> last 1.5.6 release. I'll try to make the arrangements in the next two
> weeks.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 2:40 AM jincheng sun <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > +1. There are incompatible improvements between 1.5.x and 1.6/1.7, so
> many
> > 1.5.x users may not be willing to upgrade to 1.6 or 1.7 due to migration
> > costs, so it makes sense to creating last bug fix release for 1.5 branch.
> >
> > Bests,
> > Jincheng
> >
> > Jeff Zhang <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月10日周一 上午9:24写道：
> >
> > > +1, I think very few people would use 1.6 or 1.7 in their production in
> > > near future, so I expect they would use 1.5 in production for a long
> > > period，it makes sense to provide a stable version for production usage.
> > >
> > > Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月9日周日 下午6:07写道：
> > >
> > > > +1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
> > > > also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
> > > > manageable.
> > > >
> > > > @Vino: I agree with your assessment.
> > > >
> > > > @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
> > > > the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Ufuk
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Till,
> > > > >
> > > > > Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be
> > > > supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink major
> > > > versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major
> version
> > > too
> > > > quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Qi
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Till,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially
> > some
> > > > > > serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
> > > > > > Consider that some companies' production environments are more
> > > cautious
> > > > > > about upgrading large versions.
> > > > > > I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Vino
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Dear community,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should
> > release a
> > > > last
> > > > > >> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to
> > support
> > > > the
> > > > > >> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However, the
> > > > current
> > > > > >> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the
> fixes
> > > > address
> > > > > >> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693),
> fixing
> > > > > >> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
> > > > > >> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice
> for
> > > our
> > > > users
> > > > > >> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last
> > > 1.5.6
> > > > > >> release. What do you think?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > > >> Till
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards
> > >
> > > Jeff Zhang
> > >
> >
>

[Thomas Weise]

Hi,

I would be interested to try my hand at being the release manger for this.

There are currently still 5 in-progress issues [1], all except [2] with an
open PR.

Nico, Chesnay, Till: Can you please take a look and see if these can be
completed?

Thanks,
Thomas


[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=statusCategory%20%3D%20indeterminate%20AND%20project%20%3D%2012315522%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%2012344315%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20key%20ASC
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9010






On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 3:15 PM Thomas Weise <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks Till and my belated +1 for a final patch release :)
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:47 AM Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the feedback! I conclude that the community is in favour of a
>> last 1.5.6 release. I'll try to make the arrangements in the next two
>> weeks.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 2:40 AM jincheng sun <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1. There are incompatible improvements between 1.5.x and 1.6/1.7, so
>> many
>> > 1.5.x users may not be willing to upgrade to 1.6 or 1.7 due to migration
>> > costs, so it makes sense to creating last bug fix release for 1.5
>> branch.
>> >
>> > Bests,
>> > Jincheng
>> >
>> > Jeff Zhang <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月10日周一 上午9:24写道：
>> >
>> > > +1, I think very few people would use 1.6 or 1.7 in their production
>> in
>> > > near future, so I expect they would use 1.5 in production for a long
>> > > period，it makes sense to provide a stable version for production
>> usage.
>> > >
>> > > Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月9日周日 下午6:07写道：
>> > >
>> > > > +1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
>> > > > also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
>> > > > manageable.
>> > > >
>> > > > @Vino: I agree with your assessment.
>> > > >
>> > > > @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
>> > > > the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.
>> > > >
>> > > > Best,
>> > > >
>> > > > Ufuk
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hi Till,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be
>> > > > supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink
>> major
>> > > > versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major
>> version
>> > > too
>> > > > quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Best,
>> > > > > Qi
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi Till,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially
>> > some
>> > > > > > serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
>> > > > > > Consider that some companies' production environments are more
>> > > cautious
>> > > > > > about upgrading large versions.
>> > > > > > I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Best,
>> > > > > > Vino
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> Dear community,
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should
>> > release a
>> > > > last
>> > > > > >> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to
>> > support
>> > > > the
>> > > > > >> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However,
>> the
>> > > > current
>> > > > > >> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the
>> fixes
>> > > > address
>> > > > > >> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693),
>> fixing
>> > > > > >> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
>> > > > > >> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice
>> for
>> > > our
>> > > > users
>> > > > > >> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last
>> > > 1.5.6
>> > > > > >> release. What do you think?
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Cheers,
>> > > > > >> Till
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Best Regards
>> > >
>> > > Jeff Zhang
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

[Chesnay Schepler-3]

FLINK-11023: will not be fixed for 1.5.6; this would take significantly
longer to implement, and TBH I'm not really keen on doing that for a
final bugfix release.
FLINK-7991: This is just a minor cleanup; the issue doesn't affect users
in any way. It is thus not particularly important to have for this
release and can be omitted IMO; I would also have to double-check
whether the open PR applies properly to 1.5.6, and frankly I don't have
the time for that right now anyway.
FLINK-10251: has been in review for a while, but will likely not be
merged this year from what I know.
FLINK-9253: appears to require additional changes and is also quite
outdated (it is from May after all), and looks more like a general
improvement than a bug fix from the JIRA description. I would omit this
from the release, unless Nico objects.

On 13.12.2018 17:08, Thomas Weise wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would be interested to try my hand at being the release manger for this.
>
> There are currently still 5 in-progress issues [1], all except [2] with an
> open PR.
>
> Nico, Chesnay, Till: Can you please take a look and see if these can be
> completed?
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
>
>
> [1]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=statusCategory%20%3D%20indeterminate%20AND%20project%20%3D%2012315522%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%2012344315%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20key%20ASC
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9010
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 3:15 PM Thomas Weise <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Till and my belated +1 for a final patch release :)
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:47 AM Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback! I conclude that the community is in favour of a
>>> last 1.5.6 release. I'll try to make the arrangements in the next two
>>> weeks.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Till
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 2:40 AM jincheng sun <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1. There are incompatible improvements between 1.5.x and 1.6/1.7, so
>>> many
>>>> 1.5.x users may not be willing to upgrade to 1.6 or 1.7 due to migration
>>>> costs, so it makes sense to creating last bug fix release for 1.5
>>> branch.
>>>> Bests,
>>>> Jincheng
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Zhang <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月10日周一 上午9:24写道：
>>>>
>>>>> +1, I think very few people would use 1.6 or 1.7 in their production
>>> in
>>>>> near future, so I expect they would use 1.5 in production for a long
>>>>> period，it makes sense to provide a stable version for production
>>> usage.
>>>>> Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月9日周日 下午6:07写道：
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
>>>>>> also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
>>>>>> manageable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Vino: I agree with your assessment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
>>>>>> the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ufuk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Till,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be
>>>>>> supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink
>>> major
>>>>>> versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major
>>> version
>>>>> too
>>>>>> quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> Qi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Till,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially
>>>> some
>>>>>>>> serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
>>>>>>>> Consider that some companies' production environments are more
>>>>> cautious
>>>>>>>> about upgrading large versions.
>>>>>>>> I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> Vino
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear community,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should
>>>> release a
>>>>>> last
>>>>>>>>> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to
>>>> support
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However,
>>> the
>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the
>>> fixes
>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>>> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693),
>>> fixing
>>>>>>>>> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
>>>>>>>>> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice
>>> for
>>>>> our
>>>>>> users
>>>>>>>>> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last
>>>>> 1.5.6
>>>>>>>>> release. What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Zhang
>>>>>

[mxm]

I have pushed this fix to the release-1.5 branch:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-10566

Would be great if we could include it because it has been blocking some
pipelines on the Beam side.

Thanks,
Max

On 13.12.18 20:22, Chesnay Schepler wrote:

> FLINK-11023: will not be fixed for 1.5.6; this would take significantly longer
> to implement, and TBH I'm not really keen on doing that for a final bugfix release.
> FLINK-7991: This is just a minor cleanup; the issue doesn't affect users in any
> way. It is thus not particularly important to have for this release and can be
> omitted IMO; I would also have to double-check whether the open PR applies
> properly to 1.5.6, and frankly I don't have the time for that right now anyway.
> FLINK-10251: has been in review for a while, but will likely not be merged this
> year from what I know.
> FLINK-9253: appears to require additional changes and is also quite outdated (it
> is from May after all), and looks more like a general improvement than a bug fix
> from the JIRA description. I would omit this from the release, unless Nico objects.
>
> On 13.12.2018 17:08, Thomas Weise wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would be interested to try my hand at being the release manger for this.
>>
>> There are currently still 5 in-progress issues [1], all except [2] with an
>> open PR.
>>
>> Nico, Chesnay, Till: Can you please take a look and see if these can be
>> completed?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Thomas
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=statusCategory%20%3D%20indeterminate%20AND%20project%20%3D%2012315522%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%2012344315%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20key%20ASC 
>>
>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9010
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 3:15 PM Thomas Weise <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Till and my belated +1 for a final patch release :)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:47 AM Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for the feedback! I conclude that the community is in favour of a
>>>> last 1.5.6 release. I'll try to make the arrangements in the next two
>>>> weeks.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Till
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 2:40 AM jincheng sun <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1. There are incompatible improvements between 1.5.x and 1.6/1.7, so
>>>> many
>>>>> 1.5.x users may not be willing to upgrade to 1.6 or 1.7 due to migration
>>>>> costs, so it makes sense to creating last bug fix release for 1.5
>>>> branch.
>>>>> Bests,
>>>>> Jincheng
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Zhang <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月10日周一 上午9:24写道：
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1, I think very few people would use 1.6 or 1.7 in their production
>>>> in
>>>>>> near future, so I expect they would use 1.5 in production for a long
>>>>>> period，it makes sense to provide a stable version for production
>>>> usage.
>>>>>> Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月9日周日 下午6:07写道：
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1. This seems reasonable to me. Since the fixes are already in and
>>>>>>> also part of other releases, the release overhead should be
>>>>>>> manageable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @Vino: I agree with your assessment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @Qi: As Till mentioned, the official project guideline is to support
>>>>>>> the last two minor releases, e.g. currently 1.7 and 1.6.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ufuk
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM qi luo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Till,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does Flink has an agreement on how long will a major version be
>>>>>>> supported? Some companies may need a long time to upgrade Flink
>>>> major
>>>>>>> versions in production. If Flink terminates support for a major
>>>> version
>>>>>> too
>>>>>>> quickly, it may be a concern for companies.
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> Qi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 8, 2018, at 10:57 AM, vino yang <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Till,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it makes sense to release a bug fix version (especially
>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>> serious bug fixes) for flink 1.5.
>>>>>>>>> Consider that some companies' production environments are more
>>>>>> cautious
>>>>>>>>> about upgrading large versions.
>>>>>>>>> I think some organizations are still using 1.5.x or even 1.4.x.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>> Vino
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Till Rohrmann <[hidden email]> 于2018年12月7日周五 下午11:39写道：
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Dear community,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to reach out to you and discuss whether we should
>>>>> release a
>>>>>>> last
>>>>>>>>>> bug fix release for the 1.5 branch.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since we have already released Flink 1.7.0, we only need to
>>>>> support
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches (last two major releases). However,
>>>> the
>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>> release-1.5 branch contains 45 unreleased fixes. Some of the
>>>> fixes
>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>>>> serializer duplication problems (FLINK-10839, FLINK-10693),
>>>> fixing
>>>>>>>>>> retractions (FLINK-10674) or prevent a deadlock in the
>>>>>>>>>> SpillableSubpartition (FLINK-10491). I think it would be nice
>>>> for
>>>>>> our
>>>>>>> users
>>>>>>>>>> if we officially terminated the Flink 1.5.x support with a last
>>>>>> 1.5.6
>>>>>>>>>> release. What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jeff Zhang
>>>>>>
>