Hello folks, I believe this KIP is finalized and ready for a vote. If there are no further discussions, I will proceed with filing a vote soon.
Best regards, TengYao TengYao Chi <kiting...@gmail.com> 於 2024年8月5日 週一 下午10:57寫道： > Hello folks, > I think we have reached a consensus, and we can now see if there are any > other suggestions. > > Best, > TengYao > > Andrew Schofield <andrew_schofi...@live.com> 於 2024年8月5日 週一 下午10:46寫道： > >> Hi, >> I’m happy to go with Chia-Ping’s position here. I’m just aware that this >> option is already entirely broken. Either way, it’s a very small point >> and it can >> certainly remain until its final removal in AK 5.0. >> >> Thanks, >> Andrew >> >> > On 5 Aug 2024, at 14:29, TengYao Chi <kiting...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Andrew, Chia-Ping >> > >> > Thanks for the suggestions. >> > Personally, I also want to remove this in 4.0 since it is not a >> significant >> > function. >> > But as Chia-Ping mentioned, we seem to have a ‘1-year rule’ (or >> convention) >> > for removing code, so I intend to follow the convention rather than >> being >> > too aggressive. >> > On the other hand, since this function doesn’t have much impact, maybe >> > there’s a chance to ask Colin about his thoughts. >> > What do you think? >> > >> > Best Regards, >> > TengYao >> > >> > Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@gmail.com> 於 2024年8月5日 週一 下午7:24寫道： >> > >> >>> So, I am in favour of the KIP, but I suggest that it should actually >> be >> >> removed in 4.0 >> >>> rather than deprecated in 4.0 and then removed in 5.0 because it >> already >> >> doesn’t work. >> >> >> >> noted that removing it will introduce some broken behavior. For >> >> example, the users who are using the config unintentionally will get >> >> error "delete-config is not a recognized option" >> >> >> >> I'd like to delete it in 4.0, but we need to follow the depreciation >> >> rules - remove it in major release and wait for 1-year >> >> >> >> There are some KIPs which don't wait for one year (see previous >> >> discussion: >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bwqrsk341h0op662t1qhz781ld41lo5b), >> >> but we agree they are exceptions. >> >> >> >> If this KIP-1079 can be considered to be another exception, it must be >> >> included by 3.9.0. However, we should not merge KIP-1079 into 3.9 >> >> unless Colin agrees. >> >> >> >> In short, the config is not critical and we try to follow a "complete" >> >> deprecation cycle. Hence, it should be deprecated in 4.0 and be >> >> removed in 5.0 >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> Chia-Ping >> >> >>
