[fix] [branch-3.0] fix compile error in branch 3.0

[thetumbled]

Motivation

CI in branch-3.0 can't pass due to #22130 (comment).

Modifications

The solution is: first, cherry pick #20782 into branch-3.0, then we use this pr #22143 to fix the problem.

Verifying this change

• Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.

(Please pick either of the following options)

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

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

If the box was checked, please highlight the changes

• Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
• The public API
• The schema
• The default values of configurations
• The threading model
• The binary protocol
• The REST endpoints
• The admin CLI options
• The metrics
• Anything that affects deployment

Documentation

• doc
• doc-required
• doc-not-needed
• doc-complete

Matching PR in forked repository

PR in forked repository: thetumbled#44

[thetumbled]

PTAL, thanks. @lhotari @Technoboy-

[lhotari]

@thetumbled Thanks for the fix. For tracking purposes we will need to have a 1-to-1 mapping between the cherry-picked commit. This is something that we haven't properly documented in our release process. The cherry-picking process is currently mostly tribal knowledge without clear documentation. I have ranted about this in the past on the mailing list in this thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/69mwjso51kzkrv5xgdmw04d9wngbg8br .
Yesterday, I started looking into improving the documentation of the current process. One section has been added where some thoughts and a tool is shared to prevent the problems that are present in branch-3.0.
Doc is here:
https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/release-process/#cherry-picking-changes-scheduled-for-the-release
However, that's not a description of the current process.
A lot of the problems with cherry-picking occur since cherry-picks happen in the wrong order or dependent changes don't get picked. The added section will help in that, but it contains a lot of gaps.

[codelipenghui]

Hmmm, I think we can't cherry-pick #20782 because it's not a BUG fix, and it might be risky for LTS release.

[thetumbled]

Hmmm, I think we can't cherry-pick #20782 because it's not a BUG fix, and it might be risky for LTS release.

Or we could revert #22101 in branch-3.0, which is also not a BUG fix.

[heesung-sohn]

Let's revert #22101 in branch-3.0.

[thetumbled]

Let's revert #22101 in branch-3.0.
great, close this pr.

[thetumbled]

Let's revert #22101 in branch-3.0.

great, close this pr.