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

[FLINK-15298][docs] Fix dependences in the DataStream API Tutorial doc #10607

Conversation

qinjunjerry
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change

This pull request fixes the maven dependence issues in the DataStream API tutorial doc where:

  • The scope should be 'provided' for flink-java and flink-streaming-java
  • The dependency flink-client is not needed

Brief change log

  • Added provided
  • Removed the flink-client dependency

Verifying this change

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
  • The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): no
  • The serializers: no
  • The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): no
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: no
  • The S3 file system connector: no

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? not applicable

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Dec 17, 2019

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit f58a3ea (Fri Feb 28 21:47:22 UTC 2020)

✅no warnings

Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.

Review Progress

  • ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
  • ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
  • ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
  • ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
  • ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.


The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required Bot commands
The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

  • @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
  • @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
  • @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
  • @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
  • @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Dec 17, 2019

CI report:

Bot commands The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
  • @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

Copy link
Contributor

@NicoK NicoK left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 on the removal of flink-clients. However, there is a problem with setting the other two to provided:

With these dependencies set to provided, you cannot run the example out of the box in (at least) IntelliJ anymore: you either need to enable the add-dependencies-for-IDEA profile (not recommended) or tick Include dependencies with "Provided" scope in the run configuration. We currently do not describe this anywhere.

Also, the command given for running the example ( mvn exec:java -Dexec.mainClass=wikiedits.WikipediaAnalysis) does not work anymore. So maybe as a different approach, keep the default scope and instead mention this for the bonus exercise ("Running on a Cluster").

docs/getting-started/tutorials/datastream_api.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@NicoK
Copy link
Contributor

NicoK commented May 29, 2022

sorry for not re-reviewing it earlier - since 1.9 is a bit too old now, let me close this PR

@NicoK NicoK closed this May 29, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants