Hi Omnia, I think there's a few clarifications that should still be made on the KIP, but assuming these are agreeable, I'm +1 (binding)
- In the description for the replication.policy.internal.topic.separator.enabled property (in the "Public Interfaces" section), we should specify that it affects only the checkpoints and offset syncs topic - We can remove the code snippet from the "Proposed Changes" section (right now it's a little buggy; there's two different implementations for the same "internalSuffix" method, and there are references to an "internalSeparator" method but no implementation for it); since we don't usually require specific code changes in KIPs, I think as long as we can describe the changes we're proposing in the "Public Interfaces" section, that should be enough for this KIP Cheers, Chris On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 2:04 AM Federico Valeri <fedeval...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (non binding) > > Thanks > Fede > > > On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 6:30 PM Omnia Ibrahim <o.g.h.ibra...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > I would like to open a vote for KIP-949. The proposal is here > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-949%3A+Add+flag+to+enable+the+usage+of+topic+separator+in+MM2+DefaultReplicationPolicy > > . > > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-949%3A+Add+flag+to+enable+the+usage+of+topic+separator+in+MM2+DefaultReplicationPolicy > > > > > > Thanks > > Omnia >
