Hi Chris,

+1 (binding), thanks for the KIP.

Based on discussion in other threads, it looks like the community is
aligned with having a 3.8 release before the 4.0 release so we should be
able to remove the 'tasks.max.enforce' connector property in 4.0 (we'd
discussed potentially having to live with this property until 5.0 in this
KIP's discussion thread). Once we have confirmation of a 3.8 release, will
this KIP be updated to reflect the exact AK versions where the deprecated
property will be introduced and removed?

Thanks,
Yash

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 11:37 PM Greg Harris <greg.har...@aiven.io.invalid>
wrote:

> Hey Chris,
>
> Thanks for the KIP! I think the aggressive default and deprecation
> schedule is the right choice for this change.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:01 AM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > +1 (binding), thanks for the KIP
> >
> > Mickael
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 8:55 PM Hector Geraldino (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A)
> > <hgerald...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks Chris!
> > >
> > > From: dev@kafka.apache.org At: 01/02/24 11:49:18 UTC-5:00To:
> dev@kafka.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-1004: Enforce tasks.max property in Kafka
> Connect
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Happy New Year! Wanted to give this a bump now that the holidays are
> over
> > > for a lot of us. Looking forward to people's thoughts!
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 10:36 AM Chris Egerton <chr...@aiven.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to call for a vote on KIP-1004, which adds enforcement for
> the
> > > > tasks.max connector property in Kafka Connect.
> > > >
> > > > The KIP:
> > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1004%3A+Enforce+tasks.max+
> > > property+in+Kafka+Connect
> > > >
> > > > The discussion thread:
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/scx75cjwm19jyt19wxky41q9smf5nx6d
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > >
> > >
>

Reply via email to