Skip to content

Publish Iceberg kafka connect runtime to Confluent hub #10745

Description

@ajantha-bhat

Feature Request / Improvement

We should publish the OSS Apache Iceberg kafka connecter sink to confluent hub to get the wider visibility under "apache Iceberg" account.
Similar to https://www.confluent.io/hub/tabular/iceberg-kafka-connect

Query engine

Kafka Connect

Activity

  1. ajantha-bhat commented on Jul 22, 2024

    @ajantha-bhat
    MemberAuthor
  2. jbonofre commented on Jul 22, 2024

    @jbonofre
    Member

    It makes sense to me. I would also include the Kafka connect artifact on https://iceberg.apache.org/releases/

  3. added this to the Iceberg 1.8.0 milestone on Dec 29, 2024
  4. amogh-jahagirdar commented on Jan 24, 2025

    @amogh-jahagirdar
    Contributor

    Naive question, for 1.8 are we saying that we're aiming for automation to push to Confluent Hub or is it something that for the 1.8 milestone, someone needs to manually do? If we're saying we want some automation for pushing, I feel like we should punt to the next release since i think that requires infra changes (e.g. I'm not sure if they even allow it, but if they did probably we'd need a key and whatnot)

    cc @bryanck @ajantha-bhat @jbonofre

  5. bryanck commented on Jan 24, 2025

    @bryanck
    Contributor

    Previously w/ the Tabular connector it was a manual process, we had a contact at Confluent that would upload it after performing some validation. We'd want a signed and published connector distribution before we'd tackle this I think.

  6. thjaeckle commented on Apr 28, 2025

    @thjaeckle
    Contributor

    I understand that this is a more complicated thing to do than uploading an artifact.
    For the just released 1.9.0, however, there is as well no artifact for the Kafka Connect package uploaded, mentioned also already in #11685 for 1.7.0.

    It is quite cumbersome to locally build and add it to a Docker image, every adopter of Kafka Connect has to do the same. Can I somehow support on this issue?

  7. changed the title [-]Publish Iceberg kafka connect runtime to Confluet hub[/-] [+]Publish Iceberg kafka connect runtime to Confluent hub[/+] on Apr 28, 2025
  8. manuzhang commented on May 8, 2025

    @manuzhang
    Member

    @thjaeckle Feel free to open a PR (or draft PR) if you've got it working.

  9. manuzhang commented on Jun 4, 2025

    @manuzhang
    Member

    If we can't finish this in a short time, can we attach kafka-connect zip files to https://github.com/apache/iceberg/releases and link them at https://iceberg.apache.org/releases/#downloads? At least, users don't need to build the zip files themselves.

  10. 16 remaining items

  11. liko9 commented on Jul 15, 2025

    @liko9
    Contributor

    #13561 - probably should create a separate issue for this CVE which could also be associated.

  12. ajantha-bhat commented on Sep 22, 2025

    @ajantha-bhat
    MemberAuthor

    @rmoff: Could you please try now with 1.10.0 release?

  13. rmoff commented on Oct 7, 2025

    @rmoff
    Contributor

    (Discussion about the publishing process to Confluent Hub moved to the mailing list: https://lists.apache.org/thread/hlj8kordz6hmr9wf6ktttqchwty13vlt)

  14. raphaelauv commented on Oct 15, 2025

    @raphaelauv
  15. manuzhang commented on Oct 21, 2025

    @manuzhang
    Member

    @rmoff @raphaelauv How about 1.10.0?

  16. rmoff commented on Oct 22, 2025

    @rmoff
    Contributor

    @manuzhang see my comment above - this needs someone to bundle it and the project agree a process for submitting it to Confluent Hub for publication.

  17. rmoff commented on Jan 7, 2026

    @rmoff
    Contributor

    We (Confluent) are working to package up 1.10.1, but hit a CVE - raised here #14983

  18. rmoff commented on Jan 26, 2026

    @rmoff
    Contributor

    I have started a mailing list discussion regarding formalising this process: https://lists.apache.org/thread/fc0dhqtv8717zbw01xvsc7sm203sohpd

  19. removed this from the Iceberg 1.11.0 milestone on Feb 2, 2026
  20. github-actions commented on Aug 2, 2026

    @github-actions

    This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been open for 180 days with no activity. It will be closed in next 14 days if no further activity occurs. To permanently prevent this issue from being considered stale, add the label 'not-stale', but commenting on the issue is preferred when possible.

  21. github-actions commented on Aug 17, 2026

    @github-actions

    This issue has been closed because it has not received any activity in the last 14 days since being marked as 'stale'

  22. humpfhumpf commented on Sep 11, 2026

    @humpfhumpf

    Hi @danielcweeks, since your last message on the discussion above, is this PR ready to be merged?

  23. rmoff commented on Sep 11, 2026

    @rmoff
    Contributor

    @humpfhumpf see #15212, currently blocked on licensing compliance (which I just opened a PR to attempt to clear, #18019)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions