Hello! Do we still need to separate client connector configuration from thin connector configuration from ODBC connector configuration?
I think this is a bad practice: For example, people often turn on SSL or auth on just a subset of connectors, think they are secure, when in fact they still have unsecured connector around (e.g. ODBC) and their data is not protected at all. It may solve some specific issue that you are facing, but for newcomers to project it is a drawback. I think we should seek to not add connector configurations anymore. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev пт, 23 авг. 2019 г. в 20:49, Alex Plehanov <plehanov.a...@gmail.com>: > Pavel, > > ClientConnectorConfiguration is related to JDBC, ODBC and thin clients, the > new property only related to thin clients. If we put the new property > directly into ClientConnectorConfiguration, someone might think that it > also affects JDBC and ODBC. > > пт, 23 авг. 2019 г. в 19:59, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>: > > > Igor, Alex, > > > > Not sure I agree with this: ThinClientConfiguration inside > > ClientConnectorConfiguration. > > Very confusing IMO, because ClientConnectorConfiguration is already > related > > to thin clients only. > > > > Why not put the new property directly into ClientConnectorConfiguration? > > >
