Due to the size of the project, i'd say a java 8 replace would make things easier IMO. Handling multiple versions of a project always make contributions and release cycles rather hard. I'd keep a single version as much as we could.
The biggest change would be around changing java.net.http. There are some other small things around `var` usage and such, but the biggest take is the http library. I think there are quite some providers supporting Flink 1.20 and there's no sunset plan for it, right? Thank you for engaging, David. Att, Pedro Mázala Be awesome On Sat, 4 Apr 2026 at 00:22, David Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > > > > >
