Hi Anton, I think this is a good idea given that the change is binary-compatible and it makes it more clear that both brokers and controllers are represented in the response.
Personally, I think this should be a very small KIP so that we can properly review and sign off on making the change. I know that some other projects generate code from the Kafka protocol RPC schemas, so having a KIP that documents the change and then is included in a specific release will help there too. Thanks, Andrew ________________________________________ From: Anton Agestam <anton.ages...@aiven.io.INVALID> Sent: 22 January 2025 09:42 To: dev@kafka.apache.org <dev@kafka.apache.org> Subject: [DISCUSS] Rename use of term "broker" in DescribeClusterResponse Hello, The DescribeClusterResponse protocol entity is used for modeling both brokers and controllers, however, naming of fields in this entity has not been updated to reflect this fact and causes some confusion. Renaming fields, and documentation is not breaking API compatibility, and I suggest it's worth doing this here to reflect the double-use nature of this entity. I propose specifically to rename as such: - Field name in DescribeClusterResponse: Brokers -> Nodes. - Field type: DescribeClusterBroker -> DescribeClusterNode. - Nested field name: BrokerId -> NodeId. There are also "about" strings to update accordingly, and the one for IsFenced can be clarified how it behaves for controllers (I made an assumption), this commit is what I propose in full: https://github.com/aiven-anton/kafka/commit/d006d5a62c6cbd8429f5bc6d16ea97c7a0895609 . Thanks for any feedback, Anton -- [image: Aiven] <https://www.aiven.io/> *Anton Agestam* (he/him or they/them) Software Engineer, *Aiven* anton.ages...@aiven.io | +46 704 486 289 aiven.io <https://www.aiven.io/> | <https://www.facebook.com/aivencloud> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/aiven/> <https://twitter.com/aiven_io>
