Yeah, agreed on it being the same reference. That’s the way I have it in the working PR and I’ll update the KIP for clarity.
> On Sep 3, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> wrote: > > I am strongly in favor of "must be the same reference". > > > -Matthias > >> On 9/3/19 2:09 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding). >> >> One minor comment about the following: >> >> "In order to solve the problem of addStateStore potentially being called >> twice for the same store (because more than one Supplier specifies it), the >> check for duplicate stores in addStateStores will be relaxed to *allow for >> duplicates if the same StoreBuilder instance for the same store name*." >> >> It worth clarifying how should we check if the StoreBuilder instances are >> the same: either 1) equality by reference or 2) equality based on e.g. >> #equals override function so that two different instances may still be >> considered "equal". I think you meant 1), just wanted to confirm :) >> >> >> Guozhang >> >>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Paul Whalen <pgwha...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one more >>> for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September, it >>> would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I could set >>> aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it into >>> the release. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Paul >>> >>>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks for the KIP. >>>> >>>> +1 (binding) >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 (binding) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote: >>>>>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pgwha...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is finalized >>>>> now >>>>>>> and ready for voting. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> KIP: >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Discussion: >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously): >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pgwha...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I >>>>> renamed >>>>>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as >>> well >>>>>>>> start a vote. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> KIP: >>>>>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting >>>>>>>> < >>>>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756> >>>>>>>> Discussion: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >> >
