Hi,
       We missed this vote earlier and realized thats its breaking the
       0.9.x client api compatibility.  I opened a JIRA here
       https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3633 . Can we keep
       the old methods with deprecated tag in 0.10 release.
Thanks,
Harsha

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016, at 01:51 PM, Jason Gustafson wrote:
> Looks like the KIP has passed. The finally tally is +5 among committers
> and
> +9 overall.
> 
> Thanks to Pierre-Yves Ritschard for all of the hard work and persistence
> with this!
> 
> -Jason
> 
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava
> <e...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> 
> > +1.
> >
> > Normally I'd be more of a stickler for compatibility, but this is new, I
> > think it's worth emphasizing that unstable actually means unstable & might
> > require recompile (and maybe even adapting code when we think the change
> > warrants it), and I think the impact is relatively low since those adopting
> > the new consumer know that it's very new. Agreed with Guozhang that better
> > documenting the annotations will help (and personally apologize for that
> > since we hastily introduced the annotations to give ourselves wiggle room
> > on Connect).
> >
> > -Ewen
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Joel Koshy <jjkosh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'd like to open the vote for KIP-45. We've discussed several
> > > alternatives
> > > > on the mailing list and in the KIP call, but this vote is only on the
> > > > documented KIP:
> > > >
> > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61337336.
> > > > This
> > > > change will not be compatible with 0.9, but it will provide a cleaner
> > API
> > > > long term for users to work with. This is really the last chance to
> > make
> > > an
> > > > incompatible change like this with 0.10 shortly on the way, but
> > > compatible
> > > > options (such as method overloading) could be brought up again in the
> > > > future if we find it's needed.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jason
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Ewen
> >

Reply via email to