Re: Apache Kafka 3.7.0 Release

[Apoorv Mittal]

Hi Colin,
Thanks for the response. The only reason for asking the question of
publishing the metadata is because that's present in previous client
releases. For more context, the description of PR
 holds the details and waiting
for the confirmation there prior to the merge.

Regards,
Apoorv Mittal
+44 7721681581


On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 10:22 PM Colin McCabe  wrote:

> metadata is an internal gradle module. It is not used by clients. So I
> don't see why you would want to publish it (unless I'm misunderstanding
> something).
>
> best,
> Colin
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024, at 10:05, Stanislav Kozlovski wrote:
> > Thanks for reporting the blockers, folks. Good job finding.
> >
> > I have one ask - can anybody with Gradle expertise help review this small
> > PR? https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/15127 (+1, -1)
> > In particular, we are wondering whether we need to publish module
> metadata
> > as part of the gradle publishing process.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 3:56 PM Proven Provenzano
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> We have potentially one more blocker
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16082 which might cause a
> data
> >> loss scenario with JBOD in KRaft.
> >> Initial analysis thought this is a problem and further review looks
> like it
> >> isn't but we are continuing to dig into the issue to ensure that it
> isn't.
> >> We would request feedback on the bug from anyone who is familiar with
> this
> >> code.
> >>
> >> --Proven
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best,
> > Stanislav
>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-1007: Introduce Remote Storage Not Ready Exception

[Kamal Chandraprakash]

Thank you for all the votes! I'm closing the vote thread as it is open for
more than 72 hours.
The KIP has been passed with 3 binding and 1 non-binding votes.

--
Kamal



On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 5:51 PM Satish Duggana 
wrote:

> Thanks Kamal for the KIP.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 at 17:04, Divij Vaidya  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > --
> > Divij Vaidya
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:30 AM Luke Chen  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Kamal,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the KIP.
> > > +1 (binding) from me.
> > >
> > > Luke
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 4:51 PM Christo Lolov 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Heya Kamal,
> > > >
> > > > The proposed change makes sense to me as it will be a more explicit
> > > > behaviour than what Kafka does today - I am happy with it!
> > > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding) from me
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Christo
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 09:01, Kamal Chandraprakash <
> > > > kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to call a vote for KIP-1007
> > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1007%3A+Introduce+Remote+Storage+Not+Ready+Exception
> > > > > >.
> > > > > This KIP aims to introduce a new error code for retriable remote
> > > storage
> > > > > errors. Thanks to everyone who reviewed the KIP!
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kamal
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-1012: The need for a Kafka 3.8.x release

[Josep Prat]

Hi all,

Thanks for your comments,
I reworded some parts of the KIP to express that:
- The KIP is to agree that we need at least one more minor version in the
3.x series
- Explicitly saying that the list of KIPs is not exhaustive and that if
some are not done, we would need another minor version
- Which are the KIPs/Features the community identified that should be
present in a 3.x version so they can safely migrate to a potential 4.0
version
- The timeline of 4.0 (starting after branching, not after release)
- Wording is now focusing more on the need to have at least another minor
release in 3.x to enable and ease migration to a potential 4.0 version

I always mention potential in terms of 4.0 as we don't know what will be in
there yet, and this KIP's scope is not meant to define this.

Best,

On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 10:46 PM Ismael Juma  wrote:

> I agree with Colin. Also, 4.0 would be started after 3.8 is branched (not
> after 3.8.0 is released). The rest looks good.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ismael
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 11:27 PM Colin McCabe  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks for calling the vote, Josep.
> >
> > I re-checked this, and saw something that we missed updating. One thing
> we
> > talked about earlier is that KIP-966 is actually not required for 3.8.
> What
> > is required is some way of enabling unclean leader election by default in
> > KRaft. (Which could be KIP-966, or something else). Please revise this.
> >
> > best,
> > Colin
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 5, 2024, at 02:50, Anton Agestam wrote:
> > > +1 from me.
> > >
> > > Den fre 5 jan. 2024 kl 10:33 skrev Josep Prat
> > :
> > >
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> I'd like to start a vote on KIP-1012:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1012%3A+The+need+for+a+Kafka+3.8.x+release
> > >>
> > >> Discussion thread is here:
> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/kvdp2gmq5gd9txkvxh5vk3z2n55b04s5
> > >>
> > >> Thanks!
> > >>
> > >> ---
> > >> Josep Prat
> > >> Open Source Engineering Director, aivenjosep.p...@aiven.io   |
> > >> +491715557497 | aiven.io
> > >> Aiven Deutschland GmbH
> > >> Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 Berlin
> > >> Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> > >> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> > >>
> >
>


-- 
[image: Aiven] 

*Josep Prat*
Open Source Engineering Director, *Aiven*
josep.p...@aiven.io   |   +491715557497
aiven.io    |   
     
*Aiven Deutschland GmbH*
Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 Berlin
Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1012: The need for a Kafka 3.8.x release

[Josep Prat]

Hi all,

Copying here the same message as in the VOTE thread just in case someone is
not following it (yet).
"*Thanks for your comments,*
*I reworded some parts of the KIP to express that:*
*- The KIP is to agree that we need at least one more minor version in the
3.x series*

*- Explicitly saying that the list of KIPs is not exhaustive and that if
some are not done, we would need another minor version*
*- Which are the KIPs/Features the community identified that should be
present in a 3.x version so they can safely migrate to a potential 4.0
version*
*- The timeline of 4.0 (starting after branching, not after release)*
*- Wording is now focusing more on the need to have at least another minor
release in 3.x to enable and ease migration to a potential 4.0 version*

*I always mention potential in terms of 4.0 as we don't know what will be
in there yet, and this KIP's scope is not meant to define this.*"

Best,

On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 11:50 PM Greg Harris 
wrote:

> Hi Colin,
>
> Thanks for the quick reply!
>
> > If we cannot get KIP-853 done in time for 3.8, then we'd move to have
> another 3.x release.
>
> This is the crux of my concern, and this is satisfactory. This means
> that the "must-haves" are advisory only, and don't constitute a
> binding feature list or a feature-based release. Thank you!
>
> >The intention behind saying the timeline was "rough" was to make the
> obvious comment that if we shipped 3.7 in February rather than in January,
> it would still be in the spirit of following the KIP.
> > I kind of regret putting that comment in there now, since apparently
> there was a lot of misinterpretation! It didn't mean that the KIP itself
> was just a suggestion and not binding, or that we hadn't come to a
> consensus about 3.7 being the last release.
>
> I certainly did not get that sense from reading KIP-833 or the
> discussion thread after-the-fact. I was reading it using the
> contemporary interpretation you posted here: [1]. If I were voting on
> that KIP, I would not think that I was voting for 3.7 to be the last
> 3.x release.
>
> > To make this totally clear:
> > NO vote for this KIP ===> 3.7 is the last 3.x release, as per KIP-833.
> > YES vote for this KIP ===> 3.8 is the last 3.x release.
>
> This was not the precedent set by previous major version bump
> discussions. We need a mutual consensus to advance the major version,
> and lack of consensus means by default the next release will be a
> minor release.
> If KIP-833 actually changed this precedent, then I'll vote for this
> KIP just to restore the norm, as long as it is clear to everyone that
> after 3.8 the version will bump to 3.9 (and etc) unless another
> discussion reaches consensus about the project being ready for 4.0.
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k3bbz7k0hsb4y0b2xn1lh7bjrmjowmcq
>
> Thanks!
> Greg
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 2:20 PM Colin McCabe  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Justine,
> >
> > If there are more things you think are needed in 3.8 for migration,
> let's discuss in the VOTE thread.
> >
> > best,
> > Colin
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 5, 2024, at 09:23, Justine Olshan wrote:
> > > While I agree we should have this release and should vote on it soon,
> is it
> > > worth determining the exact items we need before we vote? Just so we
> are
> > > all in agreement?
> > > There is still some discussion on the road to 4.0 thread that may be
> worth
> > > having here.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 1:25 AM Josep Prat  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Colin,
> > >> Sorry for being quiet these last days (PTO).
> > >>
> > >> I will start the vote thread right away.
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---
> > >> Josep Prat
> > >> Open Source Engineering Director, aivenjosep.p...@aiven.io   |
> > >> +491715557497 | aiven.io
> > >> Aiven Deutschland GmbH
> > >> Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 Berlin
> > >> Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
> > >> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024, 00:24 Colin McCabe  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Since this has been open for a few weeks, are there any objections
> to
> > >> > starting the vote? What do you think, Josep?
> > >> >
> > >> > Since 3.8 is going to be the next release (according to the KIP) we
> > >> should
> > >> > really vote this in as soon as possible.
> > >> >
> > >> > Also, I created a wiki page about the 3.8 release with a tentative
> > >> > schedule.
> > >> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.8.0
> > >> >
> > >> > Please let me know if these dates make sense -- they're just
> proposals
> > >> > right now.
> > >> >
> > >> > best,
> > >> > Colin
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Thu, Dec 28, 2023, at 20:14, Colin McCabe wrote:
> > >> > > On Thu, Dec 28, 2023, at 18:17, Justine Olshan wrote:
> > >> > >> Hey Colin,
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Some folks were concerned about the lack of automatic unclean
> leader
> > >> > >> election. I mentioned that KIP-966 would actually be better wi