> I don't think my question gets answered, Sorry for incorrect response :(
> why would deprecating the map > based `addSerializerToConfig` break user's recompilation? If you worry > about warnings, we could refactor out the content and create a > package-private `attachSerializersToConfig` or something similar. you are right. We can add more deprecation for this KIP. Both ProducerConfig.addSerializerToConfig(Map<String, Object> ...) and ConsumerConfig.addDeserializerToConfig(Map<String, Object> ...) can be deprecated and we add package-private variety of them. I will update KIP ! On 2020/07/07 16:12:49, Boyang Chen <reluctanthero...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, after a second thought, keeping a function which still has production > reference is ok. We probably should not make it public in the first place, > but this is not high priority either. > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 9:03 AM Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > do we just suggest they no longer have any production use case? > > > > yep > > > > > KafkaProducer internal only. Do we also want to deprecate this public > > API as well? > > > > We have to make sure users' code can keep working beyond recompilation > > when migrating to "next" release. Hence, deprecation cycle is necessary. > > > > I don't think my question gets answered, why would deprecating the map > based `addSerializerToConfig` break user's recompilation? If you worry > about warnings, we could refactor out the content and create a > package-private `attachSerializersToConfig` or something similar. > > On 2020/07/07 06:52:25, Boyang Chen <reluctanthero...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for the KIP. One question I have is that when we refer to the two > > > methods as useless, do we just suggest they no longer have any production > > > use case? If this is the case, Producer#addSerializerToConfig(Map<String, > > > Object> configs, keySerializer, valueSerializer) is only used in > > > KafkaProducer internal only. Do we also want to deprecate this public API > > > as well? > > > > > > Boyang > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 11:36 PM Manikumar <manikumar.re...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:43 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes, it does. > > > > > > > > > > I guess many people are busy wrapping up 2.6 release. Today is code > > > > freeze. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/10/20 12:11 AM, Chia-Ping Tsai wrote: > > > > > > hi Matthias, > > > > > > > > > > > > Does this straightforward KIP still need 3 votes? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2020/06/05 21:27:52, "Matthias J. Sax" <mj...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > >> +1 (binding) > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Thanks for the KIP! > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -Matthias > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On 6/4/20 11:25 PM, Chia-Ping Tsai wrote: > > > > > >>> hi All, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> I would like to start the vote on KIP-620: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=155749118 > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> -- > > > > > >>> Chia-Ping > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
