You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@polaris.apache.org by Christopher Lambert <XN...@gmx.de.INVALID> on 2025/11/03 11:00:39 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] - When to remove EclipseLink?
Hello everyone,
since there seems to be agreement on the removal, I've allowed myself to
post a PR for it here:
https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2963
Please take a look.
Thanks, Christopher
On 30.10.25 20:16, Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Now that 1.2.0 has officially been released, I'd like to re-open the
> discussion about EclipseLink removal and propose to remove it from `main`
> now (impacts the upcoming 1.3.0 or 2.0.0 release).
>
> Any concerns?
>
> Thanks,
> Dmitri.
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:41 AM Prashant Singh
> <pr...@snowflake.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> +1 to remove Eclipselink on 1.3 or later !
>>
>> Best,
>> Prashant Singh
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Doc updates: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2605
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:55 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> EL is officially deprecated since 1.0.0 [1] :)
>>>>
>>>> +1 to removing it in 1.3. I'll open a PR to add this to CHANGELOG /
>> docs.
>>>> [1]
>>>>
>> https://polaris.apache.org/releases/1.0.0/metastores/#eclipselink-deprecated
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Dmitri.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:51 AM Robert Stupp <sn...@snazy.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 on "officially" deprecating EL in 1.2 + removing it in 1.3
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:53 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with Yufei:
>>>>>> 1. I would announce EclipseLink will be removed in 1.3
>>>>>> 2. We do remove it in the 1.3 release
>>>>>> 3. I don't think we need any tool: moving from EclipseLink to JDBC
>>>>>> should be smooth and with minimal effort. For one shot effort, not
>>>>>> sure it's worth to spend time on "migration tool".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 1:41 AM Yufei Gu <fl...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> +1 on removing it. Given Polaris’ monthly release cadence, it
>> seems
>>>>> fine to
>>>>>>> wait two (remove in 1.3) or three (remove in 1.4) more releases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
>>>>> can
>>>>>>> migrate principals, but doesn't support policies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m not sure it’s worth building another type of migration tool
>> for
>>>>> this
>>>>>>> use case, we might be better off improving the existing ones.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yufei
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:10 PM Adam Christian <
>>>>>>> adam.christian.software@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are right, Russell. We should make a clear migration path,
>> so
>>>>> our
>>>>>>>> EclipseLink users are able to easily transition off on
>>> EclipseLink.
>>>>> I know
>>>>>>>> that this has come up before [1]. Let me investigate a few
>> options
>>>>> on what
>>>>>>>> guidance we can give or what tooling we can produce.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1875
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Adam
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:49 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
>>>>> dimas@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We have two migration tools:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>>
>> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/iceberg-catalog-migrator
>>>>>>>>> *
>> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
>>>>>>>>> I'm pretty confident that iceberg-catalog-migrator works well,
>>>>> but it can
>>>>>>>>> only migrate tables, not principals.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I never personally used polaris-synchronizer, still it's
>>> supposed
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> migrate all Polaris data, including principals.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Dmitri.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:13 PM Russell Spitzer <
>>>>>>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1 I think removing EclipseLink should happen soon now that
>> we
>>>>> have 2
>>>>>>>>>> releases with it deprecated. I have
>>>>>>>>>> looked too deeply into this but do we have a migration plan
>>> for
>>>>> users
>>>>>>>>>> already on EclipseLink to get over to the
>>>>>>>>>> JDBC Impl?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 12:53 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
>>>>> dimas@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing this issue up, Adam!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I support removing EclipseLink code immediately.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My rationale:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * Due to EclipseLink deprecation, non-trivial new features
>>>>> are not
>>>>>>>>>>> necessarily implemented there [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * Any new bugs reported for EclipseLink are not likely to
>>> get
>>>>>>>> attention
>>>>>>>>>>> because this backend is in decline.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * Users had better migrate to a supported backend earlier.
>>> If
>>>>>>>> migration
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> deferred, it will likely mean that any issues related to
>>>>> migration
>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>> take even longer to be found.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * Polaris 1.1.0 still has EclipseLink, which offers users
>> a
>>>>> supported
>>>>>>>>>>> version where critical issues could still be fixed, if
>> they
>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> found.
>>>>>>>>>>> * Having EclipseLink in the codebase adds overhead for new
>>>>> features
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> touch Persistence.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2197/files#diff-59a870c7af1578200236f22d35fd2eb75dc2a1e73e51218464eb7ba089217da7R759
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitri.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:27 PM Adam Christian <
>>>>>>>>>>> adam.christian.software@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Howdy Polaris Community!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I was going through our open bugs and I noticed that
>> there
>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> around 5
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 bugs related to EclipseLink persistence. I was
>>> wondering
>>>>> when we
>>>>>>>>>>>> believe a good time to remove EclipseLink would be.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I think we could probably start doing it now
>>>>> since it's
>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>> deprecated since 1.0.0 and we have a clear alternative.
>> I
>>>>> believe
>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>> several pros for our users such as streamlined
>>>>> documentation and
>>>>>>>>>> benefits
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the contributors such as less issues, dependencies,
>> and
>>>>> modules.
>>>>>>>>>>>> How do y'all feel about this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If we are aligned, I can create the issue and start
>>> working
>>>>> on it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Adam
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] - When to remove EclipseLink?
Posted by Adnan Hemani <ad...@snowflake.com.INVALID>.
+1 Let's do it!
-Adnan
On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 10:03 AM Michael Collado <co...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 Happy to remove this
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 3:00 AM Christopher Lambert <XN...@gmx.de.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> > since there seems to be agreement on the removal, I've allowed myself to
> > post a PR for it here:
> > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2963
> > Please take a look.
> > Thanks, Christopher
> >
> > On 30.10.25 20:16, Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Now that 1.2.0 has officially been released, I'd like to re-open the
> > > discussion about EclipseLink removal and propose to remove it from
> `main`
> > > now (impacts the upcoming 1.3.0 or 2.0.0 release).
> > >
> > > Any concerns?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Dmitri.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:41 AM Prashant Singh
> > > <pr...@snowflake.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 to remove Eclipselink on 1.3 or later !
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Prashant Singh
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <dimas@apache.org
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Doc updates: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2605
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:55 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> dimas@apache.org>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> EL is officially deprecated since 1.0.0 [1] :)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +1 to removing it in 1.3. I'll open a PR to add this to CHANGELOG /
> > >> docs.
> > >>>> [1]
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://polaris.apache.org/releases/1.0.0/metastores/#eclipselink-deprecated
> > >>>> Cheers,
> > >>>> Dmitri.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:51 AM Robert Stupp <sn...@snazy.de>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1 on "officially" deprecating EL in 1.2 + removing it in 1.3
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:53 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > jb@nanthrax.net
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I agree with Yufei:
> > >>>>>> 1. I would announce EclipseLink will be removed in 1.3
> > >>>>>> 2. We do remove it in the 1.3 release
> > >>>>>> 3. I don't think we need any tool: moving from EclipseLink to JDBC
> > >>>>>> should be smooth and with minimal effort. For one shot effort, not
> > >>>>>> sure it's worth to spend time on "migration tool".
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Regards
> > >>>>>> JB
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 1:41 AM Yufei Gu <fl...@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> +1 on removing it. Given Polaris’ monthly release cadence, it
> > >> seems
> > >>>>> fine to
> > >>>>>>> wait two (remove in 1.3) or three (remove in 1.4) more releases.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>
> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
> > >>>>> can
> > >>>>>>> migrate principals, but doesn't support policies.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I’m not sure it’s worth building another type of migration tool
> > >> for
> > >>>>> this
> > >>>>>>> use case, we might be better off improving the existing ones.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Yufei
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:10 PM Adam Christian <
> > >>>>>>> adam.christian.software@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> You are right, Russell. We should make a clear migration path,
> > >> so
> > >>>>> our
> > >>>>>>>> EclipseLink users are able to easily transition off on
> > >>> EclipseLink.
> > >>>>> I know
> > >>>>>>>> that this has come up before [1]. Let me investigate a few
> > >> options
> > >>>>> on what
> > >>>>>>>> guidance we can give or what tooling we can produce.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1875
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Adam
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:49 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> > >>>>> dimas@apache.org>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> We have two migration tools:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> *
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/iceberg-catalog-migrator
> > >>>>>>>>> *
> > >>
> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
> > >>>>>>>>> I'm pretty confident that iceberg-catalog-migrator works well,
> > >>>>> but it can
> > >>>>>>>>> only migrate tables, not principals.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I never personally used polaris-synchronizer, still it's
> > >>> supposed
> > >>>>> to
> > >>>>>>>>> migrate all Polaris data, including principals.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>>> Dmitri.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:13 PM Russell Spitzer <
> > >>>>>>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com
> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 I think removing EclipseLink should happen soon now that
> > >> we
> > >>>>> have 2
> > >>>>>>>>>> releases with it deprecated. I have
> > >>>>>>>>>> looked too deeply into this but do we have a migration plan
> > >>> for
> > >>>>> users
> > >>>>>>>>>> already on EclipseLink to get over to the
> > >>>>>>>>>> JDBC Impl?
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 12:53 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> > >>>>> dimas@apache.org
> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing this issue up, Adam!
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> I support removing EclipseLink code immediately.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> My rationale:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> * Due to EclipseLink deprecation, non-trivial new features
> > >>>>> are not
> > >>>>>>>>>>> necessarily implemented there [1]
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> * Any new bugs reported for EclipseLink are not likely to
> > >>> get
> > >>>>>>>> attention
> > >>>>>>>>>>> because this backend is in decline.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> * Users had better migrate to a supported backend earlier.
> > >>> If
> > >>>>>>>> migration
> > >>>>>>>>>> is
> > >>>>>>>>>>> deferred, it will likely mean that any issues related to
> > >>>>> migration
> > >>>>>>>> will
> > >>>>>>>>>>> take even longer to be found.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> * Polaris 1.1.0 still has EclipseLink, which offers users
> > >> a
> > >>>>> supported
> > >>>>>>>>>>> version where critical issues could still be fixed, if
> > >> they
> > >>>>> are
> > >>>>>>>> found.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> * Having EclipseLink in the codebase adds overhead for new
> > >>>>> features
> > >>>>>>>>> that
> > >>>>>>>>>>> touch Persistence.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2197/files#diff-59a870c7af1578200236f22d35fd2eb75dc2a1e73e51218464eb7ba089217da7R759
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Dmitri.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:27 PM Adam Christian <
> > >>>>>>>>>>> adam.christian.software@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Howdy Polaris Community!
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I was going through our open bugs and I noticed that
> > >> there
> > >>>>> are
> > >>>>>>>>> around 5
> > >>>>>>>>>>> to
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 10 bugs related to EclipseLink persistence. I was
> > >>> wondering
> > >>>>> when we
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> believe a good time to remove EclipseLink would be.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I think we could probably start doing it now
> > >>>>> since it's
> > >>>>>>>>>> been
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> deprecated since 1.0.0 and we have a clear alternative.
> > >> I
> > >>>>> believe
> > >>>>>>>>> there
> > >>>>>>>>>>> are
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> several pros for our users such as streamlined
> > >>>>> documentation and
> > >>>>>>>>>> benefits
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> to the contributors such as less issues, dependencies,
> > >> and
> > >>>>> modules.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> How do y'all feel about this?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> If we are aligned, I can create the issue and start
> > >>> working
> > >>>>> on it.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Adam
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] - When to remove EclipseLink?
Posted by Michael Collado <co...@gmail.com>.
+1 Happy to remove this
On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 3:00 AM Christopher Lambert <XN...@gmx.de.invalid>
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> since there seems to be agreement on the removal, I've allowed myself to
> post a PR for it here:
> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2963
> Please take a look.
> Thanks, Christopher
>
> On 30.10.25 20:16, Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Now that 1.2.0 has officially been released, I'd like to re-open the
> > discussion about EclipseLink removal and propose to remove it from `main`
> > now (impacts the upcoming 1.3.0 or 2.0.0 release).
> >
> > Any concerns?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dmitri.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:41 AM Prashant Singh
> > <pr...@snowflake.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 to remove Eclipselink on 1.3 or later !
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Prashant Singh
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Doc updates: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2605
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:55 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> EL is officially deprecated since 1.0.0 [1] :)
> >>>>
> >>>> +1 to removing it in 1.3. I'll open a PR to add this to CHANGELOG /
> >> docs.
> >>>> [1]
> >>>>
> >>
> https://polaris.apache.org/releases/1.0.0/metastores/#eclipselink-deprecated
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Dmitri.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:51 AM Robert Stupp <sn...@snazy.de> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 on "officially" deprecating EL in 1.2 + removing it in 1.3
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:53 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> jb@nanthrax.net
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I agree with Yufei:
> >>>>>> 1. I would announce EclipseLink will be removed in 1.3
> >>>>>> 2. We do remove it in the 1.3 release
> >>>>>> 3. I don't think we need any tool: moving from EclipseLink to JDBC
> >>>>>> should be smooth and with minimal effort. For one shot effort, not
> >>>>>> sure it's worth to spend time on "migration tool".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>> JB
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 1:41 AM Yufei Gu <fl...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> +1 on removing it. Given Polaris’ monthly release cadence, it
> >> seems
> >>>>> fine to
> >>>>>>> wait two (remove in 1.3) or three (remove in 1.4) more releases.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
> >>>>> can
> >>>>>>> migrate principals, but doesn't support policies.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I’m not sure it’s worth building another type of migration tool
> >> for
> >>>>> this
> >>>>>>> use case, we might be better off improving the existing ones.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yufei
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:10 PM Adam Christian <
> >>>>>>> adam.christian.software@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You are right, Russell. We should make a clear migration path,
> >> so
> >>>>> our
> >>>>>>>> EclipseLink users are able to easily transition off on
> >>> EclipseLink.
> >>>>> I know
> >>>>>>>> that this has come up before [1]. Let me investigate a few
> >> options
> >>>>> on what
> >>>>>>>> guidance we can give or what tooling we can produce.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1875
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Adam
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:49 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> >>>>> dimas@apache.org>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We have two migration tools:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> *
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/iceberg-catalog-migrator
> >>>>>>>>> *
> >> https://github.com/apache/polaris-tools/tree/main/polaris-synchronizer
> >>>>>>>>> I'm pretty confident that iceberg-catalog-migrator works well,
> >>>>> but it can
> >>>>>>>>> only migrate tables, not principals.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I never personally used polaris-synchronizer, still it's
> >>> supposed
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> migrate all Polaris data, including principals.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>> Dmitri.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:13 PM Russell Spitzer <
> >>>>>>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 I think removing EclipseLink should happen soon now that
> >> we
> >>>>> have 2
> >>>>>>>>>> releases with it deprecated. I have
> >>>>>>>>>> looked too deeply into this but do we have a migration plan
> >>> for
> >>>>> users
> >>>>>>>>>> already on EclipseLink to get over to the
> >>>>>>>>>> JDBC Impl?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 12:53 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> >>>>> dimas@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing this issue up, Adam!
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I support removing EclipseLink code immediately.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> My rationale:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Due to EclipseLink deprecation, non-trivial new features
> >>>>> are not
> >>>>>>>>>>> necessarily implemented there [1]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Any new bugs reported for EclipseLink are not likely to
> >>> get
> >>>>>>>> attention
> >>>>>>>>>>> because this backend is in decline.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Users had better migrate to a supported backend earlier.
> >>> If
> >>>>>>>> migration
> >>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>> deferred, it will likely mean that any issues related to
> >>>>> migration
> >>>>>>>> will
> >>>>>>>>>>> take even longer to be found.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Polaris 1.1.0 still has EclipseLink, which offers users
> >> a
> >>>>> supported
> >>>>>>>>>>> version where critical issues could still be fixed, if
> >> they
> >>>>> are
> >>>>>>>> found.
> >>>>>>>>>>> * Having EclipseLink in the codebase adds overhead for new
> >>>>> features
> >>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>> touch Persistence.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2197/files#diff-59a870c7af1578200236f22d35fd2eb75dc2a1e73e51218464eb7ba089217da7R759
> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Dmitri.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:27 PM Adam Christian <
> >>>>>>>>>>> adam.christian.software@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Howdy Polaris Community!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I was going through our open bugs and I noticed that
> >> there
> >>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>> around 5
> >>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 10 bugs related to EclipseLink persistence. I was
> >>> wondering
> >>>>> when we
> >>>>>>>>>>>> believe a good time to remove EclipseLink would be.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I think we could probably start doing it now
> >>>>> since it's
> >>>>>>>>>> been
> >>>>>>>>>>>> deprecated since 1.0.0 and we have a clear alternative.
> >> I
> >>>>> believe
> >>>>>>>>> there
> >>>>>>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>>>>> several pros for our users such as streamlined
> >>>>> documentation and
> >>>>>>>>>> benefits
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to the contributors such as less issues, dependencies,
> >> and
> >>>>> modules.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> How do y'all feel about this?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> If we are aligned, I can create the issue and start
> >>> working
> >>>>> on it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Adam
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>