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 >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> >
