It's a different interface that's being implemented. The functionality is the same (since it's just a simple pass through), but we intentionally named Converters differently than Serializers since they do more work than Serializers (besides the normal serialization they also need to convert between <serialization format> and the Connect Data API.
We could certainly reuse/extend that class instead, though I'm not sure there's much benefit in that and since they implement different interfaces and this is Connect-specific, it will probably be clearer to have it under a Connect package. Note that for other Converters the pattern we've used is to use the corresponding serializer internally and just add in the extra conversion steps for the data API. -Ewen On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm wondering why we can't just use ByteArarySerde in o.a.k.common? > > Guozhang > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava <e...@confluent.io> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I've added a pretty trivial KIP for adding a pass-through Converter for > > Kafka Connect, similar to ByteArraySerializer/Deserializer. > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > > 128%3A+Add+ByteArrayConverter+for+Kafka+Connect > > > > This wasn't added with the framework originally because the idea was to > > deal with structured data for the most part. However, we've seen a couple > > of use cases arise as the framework got more traction and I think it > makes > > sense to provide this out of the box now so people stop reinventing the > > wheel (and using a different fully-qualified class name) for each > connector > > that needs this functionality. > > > > I imagine this will be a rather uncontroversial addition, so if I don't > see > > any comments in the next day or two I'll just start the vote thread. > > > > -Ewen > > > > > > -- > -- Guozhang >
