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>

Reply via email to