Hi, > 1. use produce authentication, small changes, and compatibility with the original mode. But it's not clear and not flexible enough
I'm +1 for this solution. Thanks. Zike Yang On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 11:21 AM Zixuan Liu <node...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I prefer to use the produce authentication because it doesn't affect > the existing authentication policy. > > I agree with this idea. > > Thanks, > Zixuan > > > 丛搏 <bog...@apache.org> 于2022年10月17日周一 10:07写道： > > > Hi Enrico: > > > > Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月13日周四 17:31写道： > > > > > > Bo, > > > > > > Il giorno gio 13 ott 2022 alle ore 06:00 丛搏 <bog...@apache.org> ha > > scritto: > > > > > > > > Hello, Pulsar community: > > > > > > > > Now, we have two authentications for updating the schema > > > > 1. producer and consumer can update the schema using TopicOperation > > > > produce or consume when open autoUpdateSchema > > > > 2. pulsar admin uses Tenant authentication > > > > > > > > This will produce problems when using different authentications to > > > > update the schema. > > > > > > > > There are two solutions here: > > > > 1. use produce authentication, small changes, and compatibility with > > > > the original mode. But it's not clear and not flexible enough > > > > > > If a user can now update the schema using the Producer API, then it > > > must be allowed > > > to do so using the other APIs as well. > > > I lean towards this way > > > > > > > 2. add single update schema authentication in TopicOperation. Big > > > > changes, not compatible with the original mode, but more clear and > > > > flexible > > > We cannot break compatibility this way. > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > > > > > > I prefer to use the produce authentication because it doesn't affect > > > > the existing authentication policy. > > I agree with your opinion > > > > > > > > I hope you can discuss and provide your own views > > > > > > > > Thanks, Bo > > > > Thanks, Bo > >
