What will it mean if we port the HTTP connector to Java 8? Is the idea that the community will then support two versions of this connector until Flink 1.20 is no longer relevant, or will the Java 8 port replace the existing Java 11 implementation going forward?
I wonder if this is truly worthwhile. Is there enough interest to justify this? On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 7:38 AM Pedro Mázala <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey there, David! I can take care of Java8 porting. I need support with > reviews and pointers if necessary. > > Can we collaborate on it? I take care of the PRs and rely on your reviews. > > > Thank you for the work on this connector. > > > > Att, > Pedro Mázala > Be awesome > > > On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 at 11:06, David Radley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello, > > The Flink HTTP connector [1] was ported from a GetInData connector [2]. > > This connector is built with JAVA 11. It uses the java 11 package > > java.net.http and has 86 instances of var. I put up a release candidate > for > > a version of this supporting Flink 1.20 [3]. I see that Red Hat ends full > > support in November 30 2026 [4]. > > > > I was planning to release a v1 of this connector compatible with Flink > > 1.20 and a version 2 compatible with Flink 2.2. Though the current > > connector works with Flink 2.2. > > > > A connector shipped with Flink 1.20 support should be built at java 1.8, > > the lowest level of Java. Unfortunately, our connectors is built and > relies > > on java 11. > > > > I see the following options: > > > > 1. > > Ship as is, which is java 11 target built against Flink 1.20. This would > > with a java 11 Flink 1.20 and Flink 2.2. We would document that we will > > support Flink 2.2 but would work with 1.20 (built with Java 11). > > 2. > > Ship a 1.20 compatible version with java 8 with Flink 1.20 dependencies > > 3. > > Ship a Flink 2.2 compatible version with Flink 2.2. dependencies. > > > > Option 1 would seem most pragmatic, it provides some Flink 1.20 support. > > Option 3 would be the clean way to ship with Flink 2.2, but we would have > > no Flink 1.20 support. I am not sure what the appetite for option 2 is. > > > > Please let me know your thoughts? My requirements are met by 1 or 3 and > > I plan to implement the one we agree on. > > > > Kind regards, David. > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-http > > [2] https://github.com/getindata/flink-http-connector > > [3] > > https://lists.apache.org/[email protected]:lte=1M:radley%20vote > > [4] > > > https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013#:~:text=RHEL%207%2C%208%20or%209%20must%20be,9%20is%20usable%20with%20any%20Java%20applications > > > > > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN > > >
