Sorry I meant to add the jira as well.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15424

Justine

On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 4:34 PM Justine Olshan <jols...@confluent.io> wrote:

> Hey Satish,
>
> I was working on adding dynamic configuration for
> transaction verification. The PR is approved and ready to merge into trunk.
> I was thinking I could also add it to 3.6 since it is fairly low risk.
> What do you think?
>
> Justine
>
> On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 6:21 PM Sophie Blee-Goldman <ableegold...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Satish! The fix has been merged and cherrypicked to 3.6
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 6:02 AM Satish Duggana <satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Sophie,
>> > Please feel free to add that to 3.6 branch as you say this is a minor
>> > change and will not cause any regressions.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Satish.
>> >
>> > On Sat, 2 Sept 2023 at 08:44, Sophie Blee-Goldman
>> > <ableegold...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hey Satish, someone reported a minor bug in the Streams application
>> > > shutdown which was a recent regression, though not strictly a new one:
>> > was
>> > > introduced in 3.4 I believe.
>> > >
>> > > The fix seems to be super lightweight and low-risk so I was hoping to
>> > slip
>> > > it into 3.6 if that's ok with you? They plan to have the patch
>> tonight.
>> > >
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15429
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 5:45 PM Satish Duggana <
>> satish.dugg...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks Chris for bringing this issue here and filing the new JIRA
>> for
>> > > > 3.6.0[1]. It seems to be a blocker for 3.6.0.
>> > > >
>> > > > Please help review https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14314 as
>> Chris
>> > > > requested.
>> > > >
>> > > > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15425
>> > > >
>> > > > ~Satish.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 03:59, Chris Egerton <chr...@aiven.io.invalid
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Quick update: I've filed a separate ticket,
>> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15425, to track the
>> > behavior
>> > > > > change in Admin::listOffsets. For the full history of the ticket,
>> > it's
>> > > > > worth reading the comment thread on the old ticket at
>> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12879.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I've also published https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14314
>> as a
>> > > > fairly
>> > > > > lightweight PR to revert the behavior of Admin::listOffsets
>> without
>> > also
>> > > > > reverting the refactoring to use the internal admin driver API.
>> Would
>> > > > > appreciate a review on that if anyone can spare the cycles.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Cheers,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Chris
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 1:01 PM Chris Egerton <chr...@aiven.io>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi Satish,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Wanted to let you know that KAFKA-12879 (
>> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12879), a breaking
>> > change
>> > > > in
>> > > > > > Admin::listOffsets, has been reintroduced into the code base.
>> > Since we
>> > > > > > haven't yet published a release with this change (at least, not
>> the
>> > > > more
>> > > > > > recent instance of it), I was hoping we could treat it as a
>> > blocker for
>> > > > > > 3.6.0. I'd also like to solicit the input of people familiar
>> with
>> > the
>> > > > admin
>> > > > > > client to weigh in on the Jira ticket about whether we should
>> > continue
>> > > > to
>> > > > > > preserve the current behavior (if the consensus is that we
>> should,
>> > I'm
>> > > > > > happy to file a fix).
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Please let me know if you agree that this qualifies as a
>> blocker. I
>> > > > plan
>> > > > > > on publishing a potential fix sometime this week.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Cheers,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Chris
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 9:19 AM Satish Duggana <
>> > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> Hi,
>> > > > > >> Please plan to continue merging pull requests associated with
>> any
>> > > > > >> outstanding minor features and stabilization changes to 3.6
>> branch
>> > > > > >> before September 3rd. Kindly update the KIP's implementation
>> > status in
>> > > > > >> the 3.6.0 release notes.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Thanks,
>> > > > > >> Satish.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 21:37, Justine Olshan
>> > > > > >> <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > Hey Satish,
>> > > > > >> > Everything should be in 3.6, and I will update the release
>> plan
>> > > > wiki.
>> > > > > >> > Thanks!
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 4:08 AM Satish Duggana <
>> > > > > >> satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > wrote:
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > > Hi Justine,
>> > > > > >> > > Adding KIP-890 part-1 to 3.6.0 seems reasonable to me. This
>> > part
>> > > > looks
>> > > > > >> > > to be addressing a critical issue of consumers getting
>> stuck.
>> > > > Please
>> > > > > >> > > update the release plan wiki and merge all the required
>> > changes
>> > > > to 3.6
>> > > > > >> > > branch.
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > Thanks,
>> > > > > >> > > Satish.
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 22:19, Justine Olshan
>> > > > > >> > > <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > Hey Satish,
>> > > > > >> > > > Does it make sense to include KIP-890 part 1? It prevents
>> > > > hanging
>> > > > > >> > > > transactions for older clients. (An optimization and
>> > stronger
>> > > > EOS
>> > > > > >> > > > guarantees will be included in part 2)
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > >> > > > Justine
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 3:29 AM Satish Duggana <
>> > > > > >> satish.dugg...@gmail.com
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > >> > > > > 3.6 branch is created. Please make sure any PRs
>> targeted
>> > for
>> > > > 3.6.0
>> > > > > >> > > > > should be merged to 3.6 branch once those are merged to
>> > trunk.
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > >> > > > > Satish.
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 15:58, Satish Duggana <
>> > > > > >> satish.dugg...@gmail.com
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > Please plan to merge PRs(including the major
>> features)
>> > > > targeted
>> > > > > >> for
>> > > > > >> > > > > > 3.6.0 by the end of Aug 20th UTC. Starting from
>> August
>> > 21st,
>> > > > > >> any pull
>> > > > > >> > > > > > requests intended for the 3.6.0 release must include
>> the
>> > > > changes
>> > > > > >> > > > > > merged into the 3.6 branch as mentioned in the
>> release
>> > plan.
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > Satish.
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 at 18:39, Chris Egerton
>> > > > > >> <chr...@aiven.io.invalid>
>> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for adding KIP-949, Satish!
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 7:06 AM Satish Duggana <
>> > > > > >> > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Myself and Divij discussed and added the wiki for
>> > Kafka
>> > > > > >> > > TieredStorage
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Early Access Release[1]. If you have any
>> comments or
>> > > > > >> feedback,
>> > > > > >> > > please
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > feel free to share them.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > 1.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >>
>> > > >
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Tiered+Storage+Early+Access+Release+Notes
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Satish.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 at 08:40, Satish Duggana <
>> > > > > >> > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi Chris,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Thanks for the update. This looks to be a minor
>> > change
>> > > > > >> and is
>> > > > > >> > > also
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > useful for backward compatibility. I added it
>> to
>> > the
>> > > > > >> release
>> > > > > >> > > plan
>> > > > > >> > > > > as
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > an exceptional case.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > ~Satish.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 at 21:34, Chris Egerton
>> > > > > >> > > <chr...@aiven.io.invalid
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hi Satish,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Would it be possible to include KIP-949 (
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >>
>> > > >
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-949%3A+Add+flag+to+enable+the+usage+of+topic+separator+in+MM2+DefaultReplicationPolicy
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > )
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > in the 3.6.0 release? It passed voting
>> > yesterday,
>> > > > and
>> > > > > >> is a
>> > > > > >> > > very
>> > > > > >> > > > > small,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > low-risk change that we'd like to put out as
>> > soon as
>> > > > > >> > > possible in
>> > > > > >> > > > > order
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > patch an accidental break in backwards
>> > compatibility
>> > > > > >> caused
>> > > > > >> > > a few
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > versions
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > ago.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Best,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Chris
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 2:35 AM Satish
>> Duggana <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Whoever has KIP entries in the 3.6.0
>> release
>> > plan.
>> > > > > >> Please
>> > > > > >> > > > > update it
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > with the latest status by tomorrow(end of
>> the
>> > day
>> > > > > >> 29th Jul
>> > > > > >> > > UTC
>> > > > > >> > > > > ).
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Satish.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 12:01, Satish
>> Duggana <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Ismael and Divij for the
>> suggestions.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > One way was to follow the earlier
>> guidelines
>> > > > that
>> > > > > >> we set
>> > > > > >> > > for
>> > > > > >> > > > > any
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > early
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > access release. It looks Ismael already
>> > > > mentioned
>> > > > > >> the
>> > > > > >> > > > > example of
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > KRaft.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > KIP-405 mentions upgrade/downgrade and
>> > > > limitations
>> > > > > >> > > sections.
>> > > > > >> > > > > We can
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > clarify that in the release notes for
>> users
>> > on
>> > > > how
>> > > > > >> this
>> > > > > >> > > > > feature
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > can be
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > used for early access.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Divij, We do not want users to enable
>> this
>> > > > feature
>> > > > > >> on
>> > > > > >> > > > > production
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > environments in early access release.
>> Let us
>> > > > work
>> > > > > >> > > together
>> > > > > >> > > > > on the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > followups Ismael suggested.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ~Satish.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 02:24, Divij
>> Vaidya <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > divijvaidy...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Those are great suggestions, thank
>> you. We
>> > > > will
>> > > > > >> > > continue
>> > > > > >> > > > > this
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > discussion
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > forward in a separate KIP for release
>> > plan for
>> > > > > >> Tiered
>> > > > > >> > > > > Storage.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu 27. Jul 2023 at 21:46, Ismael
>> Juma
>> > <
>> > > > > >> > > > > m...@ismaeljuma.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Divij,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the points you bring up for
>> > > > discussion
>> > > > > >> are
>> > > > > >> > > all
>> > > > > >> > > > > good.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > My main
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > feedback is that they should be
>> > discussed
>> > > > in the
>> > > > > >> > > context
>> > > > > >> > > > > of
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > KIPs vs
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > release template. That's why we have
>> a
>> > > > backwards
>> > > > > >> > > > > compatibility
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > section for
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > every KIP, it's precisely to ensure
>> we
>> > think
>> > > > > >> > > carefully
>> > > > > >> > > > > about
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > some of
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > points you're bringing up. When it
>> > comes to
>> > > > > >> defining
>> > > > > >> > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > meaning of
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > early
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > access, we have two options:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Have a KIP specifically for tiered
>> > > > storage.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Have a KIP to define general
>> > guidelines
>> > > > for
>> > > > > >> what
>> > > > > >> > > early
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > access
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > means.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does this make sense?
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ismael
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 6:38 PM Divij
>> > > > Vaidya <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > divijvaidy...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the response, Ismael.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Specifically in context of 3.6,
>> I
>> > > > wanted
>> > > > > >> this
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > compatibility
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guarantee point to encourage a
>> > discussion
>> > > > on
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >>
>> > > >
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-952%3A+Regenerate+segment-aligned+producer+snapshots+when+upgrading+to+a+Kafka+version+supporting+Tiered+Storage
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Due to lack of producer snapshots
>> in
>> > <2.8
>> > > > > >> > > versions, a
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > customer may
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be able to upgrade to 3.6 and use
>> TS
>> > on a
>> > > > > >> topic
>> > > > > >> > > which
>> > > > > >> > > > > was
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > created
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > when
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the cluster was on <2.8 version
>> (see
>> > > > > >> motivation for
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > details). We
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > can
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discuss and agree that it does not
>> > break
>> > > > > >> > > compatibility,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > which is
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > fine.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I want to ensure that we have a
>> > > > discussion
>> > > > > >> > > soon on
>> > > > > >> > > > > this
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > reach a
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conclusion.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. I will start a KIP on this for
>> > further
>> > > > > >> > > discussion.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. In the context of 3.6, this
>> would
>> > mean
>> > > > that
>> > > > > >> > > there
>> > > > > >> > > > > should
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > be
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no-regression, if a user does "not"
>> > > > turn-on
>> > > > > >> remote
>> > > > > >> > > > > storage
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > (early
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > access feature) at a cluster
>> level. We
>> > > > have
>> > > > > >> some
>> > > > > >> > > known
>> > > > > >> > > > > cases
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > (such
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > as
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15189)
>> > > > > >> > > > > which
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > violate
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > this
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compatibility requirement. Having
>> this
>> > > > > >> guarantee
>> > > > > >> > > > > mentioned
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > in the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > release plan will ensure that we
>> are
>> > all
>> > > > in
>> > > > > >> > > agreement
>> > > > > >> > > > > with
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > which
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > cases
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are truly blockers and which
>> aren't.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Fair, instead of a general goal,
>> > let me
>> > > > > >> put it
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > specifically in
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > context of 3.6. Let me know if
>> this is
>> > > > not the
>> > > > > >> > > right
>> > > > > >> > > > > forum
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > for this
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussion.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once a user "turns on" tiered
>> storage
>> > > > (TS) at
>> > > > > >> a
>> > > > > >> > > cluster
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > level, I am
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > proposing that they should have the
>> > > > ability to
>> > > > > >> > > turn it
>> > > > > >> > > > > off
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > as well
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > at
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a cluster level. Since this is a
>> topic
>> > > > level
>> > > > > >> > > feature,
>> > > > > >> > > > > folks
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > may not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > spin up a separate cluster to try
>> this
>> > > > > >> feature,
>> > > > > >> > > hence,
>> > > > > >> > > > > we
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > need to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ensure that we provide them with
>> the
>> > > > ability
>> > > > > >> to try
>> > > > > >> > > > > tiered
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > storage
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > for
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a topic which could be deleted and
>> > > > featured
>> > > > > >> > > > > turned-off, so
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > that
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > rest
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the production cases are not
>> > impacted.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. Agree on not making public
>> > interface
>> > > > > >> change as a
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > requirement
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > but we
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should define what "early access"
>> > means in
>> > > > > >> that
>> > > > > >> > > case.
>> > > > > >> > > > > Users
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > may
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > not be
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aware that "early access" public
>> APIs
>> > may
>> > > > > >> change
>> > > > > >> > > > > (unless I am
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > missing
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some documentation somewhere
>> > completely,
>> > > > in
>> > > > > >> which
>> > > > > >> > > case
>> > > > > >> > > > > I
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > apologize
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > for
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bringing this naive point).
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divij Vaidya
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 2:27 PM
>> Ismael
>> > > > Juma <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > m...@ismaeljuma.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Divij,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some of these are launch
>> checklist
>> > items
>> > > > > >> (not
>> > > > > >> > > really
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > goals) and
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > some
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compatibility guarantees. More
>> > below.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 12:10 PM
>> Divij
>> > > > Vaidya
>> > > > > >> <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > divijvaidy...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Satish
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could we consider adding
>> "launch
>> > > > goals"
>> > > > > >> in the
>> > > > > >> > > > > release
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > plan.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > While
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some of these may be implicit,
>> it
>> > > > would be
>> > > > > >> > > nice to
>> > > > > >> > > > > list
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > them
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > down in
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the release plan. For this
>> > release,
>> > > > our
>> > > > > >> launch
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > requirements
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > would be:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Users should be able to
>> upgrade
>> > > > from
>> > > > > >> any
>> > > > > >> > > prior
>> > > > > >> > > > > Kafka
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > version to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > this
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > version.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is part of the compatibility
>> > > > > >> guarantees. The
>> > > > > >> > > > > upgrade
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > notes
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > mention
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this already. If there is a
>> change
>> > in a
>> > > > > >> given
>> > > > > >> > > > > release, it
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > should
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > definitely
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be highlighted.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. On release, this version (or
>> it's
>> > > > > >> > > dependencies)
>> > > > > >> > > > > would
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > have any
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > known MEDIUM/HIGH CVE.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a new policy and the
>> details
>> > > > should
>> > > > > >> be
>> > > > > >> > > > > discussed.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > In
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > particular,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the threshold (medium or high).
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Presence of any "early
>> > access"/"beta"
>> > > > > >> feature
>> > > > > >> > > > > should not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > impact
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other production features when
>> it
>> > is
>> > > > not
>> > > > > >> > > enabled.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a general guideline for
>> > early
>> > > > access
>> > > > > >> > > > > features and
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > specific
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this release. It would be good to
>> > have a
>> > > > > >> page
>> > > > > >> > > that
>> > > > > >> > > > > talks
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > about
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > these
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Once enabled, users should
>> have
>> > an
>> > > > > >> option to
>> > > > > >> > > > > disable any
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > "early
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > access"/"beta" feature and
>> resume
>> > > > normal
>> > > > > >> > > production
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > features,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > i.e.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > impact of beta features should
>> be
>> > > > > >> reversible.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This needs discussion and I don't
>> > think
>> > > > it's
>> > > > > >> > > > > reasonable as
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > a
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > general
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rule.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For example, Kraft early access
>> > wasn't
>> > > > > >> reversible
>> > > > > >> > > > > and it
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > was not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > feasible
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for it to be.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. KIP-405 will be available in
>> > "early
>> > > > > >> > > access"/"beta"
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > mode. Early
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > access/beta means that the
>> public
>> > > > facing
>> > > > > >> > > > > interfaces won't
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > change in
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > future but the implementation
>> is
>> > not
>> > > > > >> > > recommended
>> > > > > >> > > > > to be
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > used in
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > production.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think it's ok to make
>> this a
>> > > > > >> requirement.
>> > > > > >> > > > > Early
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > access
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > is a way
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > get early feedback and all types
>> of
>> > > > changes
>> > > > > >> > > should
>> > > > > >> > > > > be on
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > table.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > They
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would be discussed via KIPs as
>> > usual. I
>> > > > > >> believe
>> > > > > >> > > > > there were
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > some
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > incompatible changes for Kraft
>> > during
>> > > > the
>> > > > > >> early
>> > > > > >> > > > > access
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > period
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > although
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > team aimed to minimize work
>> required
>> > > > during
>> > > > > >> > > > > upgrades. I
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > have
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > mentioned
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kraft a couple of times since
>> it's a
>> > > > good
>> > > > > >> > > example of
>> > > > > >> > > > > a
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > large
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > feature
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > went through this process.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ismael
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Divij Vaidya
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to