I updated the RB changing some of the HIGH to MEDIUM and LOW. There might be other or different opinions and they may change over time so I don't really see h/m/l as a blocker to the patch going in.
It would be great to take all the rb feedback from today and then tomorrow rebase and include changes for a new patch. Then over the next day or two review, test and commit to trunk (or re-work if necessary). /******************************************* Joe Stein Founder, Principal Consultant Big Data Open Source Security LLC http://www.stealth.ly Twitter: @allthingshadoop <http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop> ********************************************/ On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Andrii Biletskyi < andrii.bilets...@stealth.ly> wrote: > It'd be great to have it on trunk. > As I mentioned under jira ticket (KAFKA-1845) current implementation lacks > correct Importance settings. > I'd be grateful if somebody could help me with it (a simple mapping between > config setting and importance or comments right in the review board would > suffice). > > Thanks, > Andrii Biletskyi > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Gwen Shapira <gshap...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > Strong +1 from me (obviously). Lots of good reasons to do it: > > consistency, code reuse, better validations, etc, etc. > > > > I had one comment on the patch in RB, but it can also be refactored as > > follow up JIRA to avoid blocking everyone who is waiting on this. > > > > Gwen > > > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Joe Stein <joe.st...@stealth.ly> wrote: > > > Hey, I wanted to start a quick convo around some changes on trunk. Not > > sure > > > this requires a KIP since it is kind of internal and shouldn't affect > > users > > > but we can decide if so and link this thread to that KIP if so (and > keep > > > the discussion going on the thread if makes sense). > > > > > > Before making any other broker changes I wanted to see what folks > thought > > > about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1845 ConfigDec > patch. > > > > > > I agree it will be nice to standardize and use one configuration and > > > validation library across the board. It helps in a lot of different > > changes > > > we have been discussing also in 0.8.3 and think we should make sure it > is > > > what we want if so then: review, commit and keep going. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > /******************************************* > > > Joe Stein > > > Founder, Principal Consultant > > > Big Data Open Source Security LLC > > > http://www.stealth.ly > > > Twitter: @allthingshadoop <http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop> > > > ********************************************/ > > >
