Fair enough. I will isolate KIP-706 later.
On 2021/01/30 20:18:42 Ismael Juma wrote: > I agree with Jason and would rather tackle this as one KIP and the error > handling in another. The error handling can follow this one once we agree > on the method signatures. Furthermore, we should align with the longer term > plan for the AdminClient that returns KafkaFuture today. > > Ismael > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 11:40 AM Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I'd like to merge KIP-706 to KIP-691 as it can bring a comprehensive > > design for both new API and exception. The new exception should be included > > by the new API also. > > > > On 2021/01/30 19:30:40, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > I think this still makes sense as a separate KIP. For KIP-691, we are > > just > > > looking to help define the error contract for the new API. > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 8:39 AM Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > Are we saying that we won't pursue this KIP in favor of the other one? > > > > > > > > Ismael > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2021, 4:15 AM Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > hi Jason > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your response. "transmit" is good to me. > > > > > > > > > > As we discussed by email, KIP-706 is going to be merged to KIP-691( > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/PSfZCQ). Hence, please feel > > free > > > > to > > > > > replace "produce" by "transmit" in KIP-691. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Chia-Ping > > > > > > > > > > On 2021/01/30 00:48:38, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Chia-Ping, > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this is a great idea. It is a pity that we cannot continue > > to > > > > use > > > > > > the `send` verb, but I don't see how we can. I know we considered > > > > > > `transmit` as another option which is closer to `send`. That would > > > > avoid > > > > > > the redundancy when people choose the common "producer" variable > > name. > > > > > > > > > > > > producer.transmit > > > > > > > > > > > > instead of > > > > > > > > > > > > producer.produce > > > > > > > > > > > > A couple alternatives might be `write` or `append`. I'm happy with > > > > > > `produce` as well, but curious if others have thoughts. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 9:37 AM Chia-Ping Tsai < > > chia7...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to start the discussion thread for KIP-706: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=100829459 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KIP-706 is proposing to introduce new API "CompletionStage > > > > > > > produce(record)" to Producer. Kafka users can leverage > > > > CompletionStage > > > > > to > > > > > > > write asynchronous non-blocking code. CompletionStage is more > > > > powerful > > > > > than > > > > > > > Future and callback. Also, the code using Future and callback > > can be > > > > > easily > > > > > > > re-written by CompletionStage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > Chia-Ping > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
