I agree. I don't think we can start a vote without closing all open issues
raised in the discussion, until a given timeout - 3 days is not
enough timeout IMO

On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 9:16 AM Michael Marshall <mmarsh...@apache.org>
wrote:

> We did not have this discussion or vote open long enough. The
> discussion started on a Saturday and then the vote started on Monday.
> The vote was closed 24 hours later.
>
> I just sent a note to the discussion thread. I would like to discuss
> increasing the scope of this PIP before we officially close this vote.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 4:29 PM <mattisonc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Passed the voting by  8 +1 (5 binding and 3 non-binding)
> >
> > Closed.
> >
> > Best,
> > Mattison
> > On Jan 31, 2023, 06:57 +0800, mattisonc...@gmail.com, wrote:
> > > Hello everyone.
> > >
> > > I would like to start the vote for PIP-242
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/19239,
> > > Please let me know if you have any concerns or questions.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Mattison
> > >
> > > ------- Paste original PIP content to help quote ------
> > >
> > > ### Motivation
> > >
> > > Currently, the Apache Pulsar broker allows users to create a topic
> name that includes `-partition-`, which is confusing for our developers to
> identify whether this is a partition of a partitioned topic. Plus, we need
> to add more logic to be compatible with this special topic name. for
> example:
> > >
> > > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19240
> > > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19230
> > > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19171
> > > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19086
> > > - ...
> > >
> > > ### Goal
> > > This proposal wants `-partition-` to be a topic name keyword. Users
> can only create a topic with it if the topic is partitioned. For the
> compatibility reason, we want to Introduce a new configuration -
> `enableStrictTopicName` for the broker to help reject creating a topic in
> the following cases:
> > > 1. Create a partitioned topic that includes `-partition-`.
> > > 2. Create a topic which is not a partitioned topic.
> > >
> > > **Create a topic:**
> > > _no corresponding partitioned topic_
> > >
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name (passed)
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-z (rejected by
> keyword)
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-0 (rejected by
> keyword)
> > >
> > > _Has corresponding partitioned topic, **partitions=2** and topic
> partition name is **persistent://public/default/local-name**_
> > >
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-0 (passed, Because
> it is the partition topic's sub-partition)
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-z (rejected by
> keyword)
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-4 (rejected,
> Because it exceeds the number of maximum partitions)
> > >
> > > **Create a partitioned topic(topic metadata)**
> > >
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name (passed)
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-z (rejected by
> keyword)
> > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-0 (rejected by
> keyword)
> > >
> > >
> > > ### API Changes
> > >
> > > Add a new configuration, `enableStrictTopicName=false`.
> > >
> > > ### Implementation
> > >
> > > 1. Add configuration `enableStrictTopicName=false`.
> > > 2. Add rejection logic when the user enables `enableStrictTopicName`.
> > > 4. Add warning logs to inform users that we do not recommend creating
> non-partitioned topics with the keyword `-partition-`.
> > > 5. Make `enableStrictTopicName=true` in the next major release.
>

Reply via email to