Hi, Jiunn-Yang, Thanks for the reply.
Q2. What about existing empty values for group.coordinator.rebalance.protocols and process.roles during upgrade? Jun On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 7:29 AM 黃竣陽 <s7133...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Jun, > > Thanks for review this KIP. > > Q1 & Q3: > I’ve updated the method name accordingly and revised the cleanup.policy > documentation > to clarify that the none policy cannot be used with any other policy. > > Q2: > For users currently using an empty cleanup.policy, the approach is to > apply the none policy > during the preProcessParsedConfig step. Additionally, a warning message > will be emitted to inform users > of the upcoming change. > > Best Regards, > Jiunn-Yang > > > Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io.INVALID> 於 2025年4月22日 凌晨4:52 寫道： > > > > Hi, Jiunn-Yang, > > > > Thanks for the KIP. A few comments. > > > > 1. It's fine to introduce a new value None for cleanup.policy. But now > not > > all value combinations are valid. For example, None can't be used with > > Delete or Compact. It would be useful to document that. > > 2. What's the behavior during upgrade when an existing config has an > empty > > list. > > 3. inWithEmptyCheck: It's not clear what the empty check does. How about > > sth like inNonEmpty ? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jun > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 8:25 AM 黃竣陽 <s7133...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hello everyone, > >> > >> I would like to start a discussion on KIP-1161: cleanup.policy shouldn't > >> be empty > >> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/HArXF> > >> > >> This proposal aims to improve the cleanup.policy configuration. > Currently, > >> this setting should not be left empty. > >> Therefore, there are two proposed improvements: > >> 1. Update ValidList to validate whether an empty list is allowed. > >> 2. Introduce a new 'none' value for cleanup.policy. > >> > >> Best Regards, > >> Jiunn-Yang > >
