Hi Ron/Harsha/Satish, Thanks for reviewing the KIP!
We should perhaps have a wider discussion outside this KIP for refactoring clients so that others who are not following this KIP also notice the discussion. Satish, would you like to start a discussion thread on dev? Regards, Rajini On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 6:21 PM Satish Duggana <satish.dugg...@gmail.com> wrote: > I felt the same need when we want to add a pluggable API for core > server functionality. This does not need to be part of this KIP, it > can be a separate KIP. I can contribute those refactoring changes if > others are OK with that. > > It is better to have a structure like below. > > kafka-common: > common classes which can be used in any of the other modules in Kafka > like client, Kafka-server-common and server etc. > > kafka-client-common: > common classes which can be used in the client module. This can be > part of client module itself. > > kafka-server-common: > classes required only for kafka-server. > > Thanks. > Satish. > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 9:28 PM Harsha Chintalapani <ka...@harsha.io> > wrote: > > > > Thanks for the KIP Rajini. > > Quick thought, it would be good to have a common module outside of > clients > > that only applies to server side interfaces & changes. It looks like we > are > > increasingly in favor of using Java interface for pluggable modules on > the > > broker side. > > > > Thanks, > > Harsha > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 2:31 PM, Rajini Sivaram <rajinisiva...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have created a KIP to replace the Scala Authorizer API with a new > Java > > > API: > > > > > > - > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/ > > > KIP-504+-+Add+new+Java+Authorizer+Interface > > > > > > This is replacement for KIP-50 which was accepted but never merged. > Apart > > > from moving to a Java API consistent with other pluggable interfaces > in the > > > broker, KIP-504 also attempts to address known limitations in the > > > authorizer. If you have come across other limitations that you would > like > > > to see addressed in the new API, please raise these on the discussion > > > thread so that we can consider those too. All suggestions and feedback > are > > > welcome. > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > Rajini > > > >
