What Chia-Ping says.

To me, if we remove it in 4.0, we did not really keep it for 1 year if deprecated in 3.7, but it's subject to debate. At least for KS, we always kept stuff of the last 3 releases.

I agree, that KIP-1124 should focus on clients/streams, and we want to keep the code as-is for 4.0 release, and remove these API in Connect, I have no objections at all.

Thus, the question is not really about KIP-1124 directly, but more about 4.0 release in particular.

Seems the verdict is, to keep the code as-is for 4.0 and remove these Connect API with 4.0.0. Works for me.


-Matthias

On 3/3/25 9:02 AM, Chia-Ping Tsai wrote:
So that's 3 releases (3.7, 3.8 and 3.9) and over 1 year, no?

KIP-1124 highlights "we keep deprecated APIs for at least 3 prior
versions," but the Connect API change does not follow this rule. It is
valid if the deprecation happens in 3.6.

Best,
Chia-Ping

Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com> 於 2025年3月4日 週二 上午12:40寫道:

Hi,

For the Connect REST API change, the deprecation is in 3.7.0 which
released in February 2024. So that's 3 releases (3.7, 3.8 and 3.9) and
over 1 year, no?

Mickael

On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 5:31 PM Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@gmail.com> wrote:

hi all,

I am also happy to follow Ismael's proposal and say "at least 3
releases
_and_ a minimum of 12 months".

+1 to this proposal

Another example is

https://github.com/apache/kafka/commit/a753172ad3e0927f412fb56e468c95a9a81ba3ad
We deprecated our log4j1 appender in 3.8.0 and it's been removed in
4.0.0. Kafka 3.8.0 released in May 2024, so it's less than 1 year.

Yes, that's also an exception. Fortunately, this "breaking" change
doesn't
affect the client, Streams, or Connect update path

I personally suggest creating a separate KIP to detail the new
deprecation
rules (and create a new thread for this topic) . KIP-1124 only covers a
portion of deprecation issues, specifically API compatibility for
clients,
Streams, and Connect. As Mickael mentioned, 4.0 cannot fully comply with
the new deprecation rules across the entire project. KIP-1124 should
focus
on reaching consensus regarding the consistency we can achieve in 4.0.

Best,
Chia-Ping


Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> 於 2025年3月4日 週二 上午12:25寫道:

Thanks Mickeal,

I guess the question is, if we think we need to revert these removals,
or if it's more reasonable to make an exception from the rule?

I cannot really judge it, as I am not familiar with the details for
Connect. Any suggestions from your side?


-Matthias

On 3/3/25 7:44 AM, Mickael Maison wrote:
Hi,

Another example is


https://github.com/apache/kafka/commit/a753172ad3e0927f412fb56e468c95a9a81ba3ad
We deprecated our log4j1 appender in 3.8.0 and it's been removed in
4.0.0. Kafka 3.8.0 released in May 2024, so it's less than 1 year.

Thanks,
Mickael

On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 4:40 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org>
wrote:

   From


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Time+Based+Release+Plan

We break compatibility (i.e. remove deprecated public methods
after a
reasonable period, and typically wait 1 year after deprecation).

To me, given that we do 3 releases per year, "1 year" as stated
above
and 3 releases, is just the same thing.

I am also happy to follow Ismael's proposal and say "at least 3
releases
_and_ a minimum of 12 months".


-Matthias


On 3/3/25 6:48 AM, Ismael Juma wrote:
Hi Chia-Ping and Bruno,

Right. Matthias stated that the 3 releases rule is the source of
truth
and
I don't recall that being the case. The source of truth is 12
months -
I
was one of the people who was part of that discussion when the
Scala
consumer was removed. I also disagree that the 3 releases rule is
strictly
better since we can sometimes have shorter release cycles (like the
intent
with the 3.9 release). I am ok with adjusting the rule to be "at
least
3
releases _and_ a minimum of 12 months" as part of this KIP, but we
should
be clear that we're proposing a change as part of this KIP (vs
following an
existing rule).

Ismael

On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 1:24 AM Bruno Cadonna <cado...@apache.org>
wrote:

Hi,

I suspect that the three-release-rule was a derivation from the
1-year-rule since we usually have three releases in one year.

IMO, a three-release rule is easier to reason about, because you
don't
need to know when the release took place.

However, I recognize that the 1-year-rule seems to be the official
rule.

Best,
Bruno

On 03.03.25 09:58, Chia-Ping Tsai wrote:
hi Ismael

The thread[0] contains a brief discussion about the one-year
rule.
I've
also updated the KIP page[1] to highlight this rule. However,
declaring
[3.7-3.9] as API compatible with 4.0 can be unrelated to the
one-year
rule.
We can do this for consistency, ensuring clients, Streams, and
Connect
have
the same version range. Additionally, we can address this by
reverting a
minor commit. If we don't agree on consistency, we can update the
KIP to
include different API compatibility versions for Connect.

[0]
https://lists.apache.org/thread/j7n4qqsvxz84f5cg89kdm9foby36j28n
[1]



https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=65867320&selectedPageVersions=9&selectedPageVersions=8

Best,
Chia-Ping










Reply via email to