“allow=false” seems a bit more intuitive to me than “suppress=false”

Brandon

> On Aug 22, 2018, at 8:48 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> We may also consider :
> 
> "suppress.auto.topic.creation"
> 
> or
> 
> "allow.auto.topic.creation"
> 
> w.r.t. suppress or allow, I don't have strong opinion either. It's just a
> matter of choosing the proper default value.
> 
> Cheers
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:00 PM Dhruvil Shah <dhru...@confluent.io> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Matthias,
>> 
>> Do you mean something like "suppress.auto.create.topic"? I am leaning a bit
>> towards "allow.auto.create.topics" but I don't have a strong preference
>> either. Let's wait to hear if anyone else has an opinion on this.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Dhruvil
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 5:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks for the KIP Dhruvil!
>>> 
>>> I agree with Jason's comment. An alternative might be to use "suppress"
>>> what would revert the logic of "allow". Not sure which one is more
>>> intuitive and I am fine with both (no personal preference). Just wanted
>>> to mention it as an alternative.
>>> 
>>> Don't have any further comments/question so far.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Matthias
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 8/21/18 4:42 PM, Jason Gustafson wrote:
>>>> Hey Dhruvil,
>>>> 
>>>> I would suggest using the verb "allow" rather than "enable. The
>> consumer
>>>> cannot enable auto topic creation because it is configured on the
>> broker.
>>>> All it can do is prevent it from happening if it is enabled.
>>>> 
>>>> -Jason
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Dhruvil Shah <dhru...@confluent.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would like to start discussion on KIP-361 that proposes we add a
>>> consumer
>>>>> configuration to disable auto topic creation.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Link to the KIP:
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-361%3A+Add+Consumer+
>>>>> Configuration+to+Disable+Auto+Topic+Creation
>>>>> 
>>>>> Suggestions and feedback are welcome!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Dhruvil
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Reply via email to