Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.0 Candidate 1

[Andras Beni]

+1 (non binding)

Checks done:

- Validated checksums and signatures

- Compiled from source w/ JDK11

- Ran Pulsar standalone and produced-consumed from CLI and validated Java
functions

Andras

On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 4:08 PM PengHui Li  wrote:

> This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.10.0.
>
> It fixes the following issues:
>
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+milestone%3A2.10.0+is%3Amerged+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.1+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.2
>
> *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> open
> for at least 72 hours ***
>
> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> convenience.
>
> Source and binary files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.10.0-candidate-1/
>
> SHA-512 checksums:
>
>
> 3bd99e0d48c0e7df247b558aa0e0761f4652264948944b4cacbbacf6ee4052a58a73c0869b660359972f91979fd1bef46b0a980f02a8b8cfb193feb076217606
>  apache-pulsar-2.10.0-bin.tar.gz
>
> cf3a1c5aa25bc0c8264e8dc4ef53106503c7448aafa9a779e143b07a9426cf58579289930f750748f85910312194b6dc5bd65cded5b0df7b40ae0aca174023ef
>  apache-pulsar-2.10.0-src.tar.gz
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1142/
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> v2.10.0-candidate-1 (c58e6e8b33a487b6d9dd10410b7620d33ecb994f)
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.10.0-candidate-1
>
> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
>
> Docker images:
>
> pulsar:2.10.0 [1]
> pulsar-all:2.10.0 [2]
>
> Please download the source package, and follow the Release Candidate
> Validation[3]
> to validate the release
>
> [1]
>
> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193225180/lph890127/pulsar/2.10.0/images/sha256-c264084cd34e3952ec4c1f4177c5122251ef39a3af60b7a229851972675706d8?context=repo
> [2]
>
> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193227776/lph890127/pulsar-all/2.10.0/images/sha256-7e2297dfabbd1d433198c3bc906c09802394da0d41393f2069e515d7131e4be2?context=repo
> [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation
>

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] cmodi-cogito commented on pull request #235: Remove completed init jobs using ttl

[GitBox]

cmodi-cogito commented on pull request #235:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/235#issuecomment-1047613900


   @lhotari can you merge this ?


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[VOTE] Pulsar Node.js Client Release 1.6.0 Candidate 1

[Guangning E]

Hi everyone,
Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 1.6.0,
as follows:
[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)

This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar Node.js client,
version 1.6.0.

It fixes the following issues:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/milestone/1?closed=1

Please download the source files and review this release candidate:
- Review release notes
- Download the source package (verify shasum and asc) and follow the
README.md to build and run the Pulsar Node.js client.

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Source files:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-client-node/pulsar-client-node-1.6.0-candidate-1/

Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS

SHA-512 checksum:
64662be31053f76260a6f677bce87a5448f7377f1dae17bfbf69a2947084844ab8e78aee8716ed8dc70a586c1ca160f1d57a5b7e1637a538d2b318bfd62622be
 pulsar-client-node-1.6.0.tar.gz

The tag to be voted upon:
v1.6.0-rc.1
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/releases/tag/v1.6.0-rc.1

Cherry-picking topic compaction fixes to branch-2.7

[PengHui Li]

Hi all,

I want to start a discussion for cherry-picking topic compaction fixes[1]
into branch-2.7.
Mainly based on the following considerations:

1. Without these fixes, the reader will skip data from the compacted topic
2. The compactor might skip some data which introduced data lost in some
cases
3. The system topic uses the compacted topic which means without these
fixes, the topic policy will not work as expected, and we have
cherry-picked all the topic policy fixes[2] into branch-2.7

Previously, we only cherry-picked these fixes into branch-2.8 and
branch-2.9.

WDYT?

[1]
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.7.6+is%3Aclos[
…]l%3Acomponent%2Fcompaction+-label%3Acherry-picked%2Fbranch-2.7+
[2]
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues?page=2&q=label%3Acomponent%2Ftopic-policy+is%3Aclosed

Thanks,
Penghui

Re: Cherry-picking topic compaction fixes to branch-2.7

[PengHui Li]

Sorry, the wrong link was provided in the last email.

[1]
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.7.6+is%3Aclosed+label%3Acomponent%2Fcompaction+-label%3Acherry-picked%2Fbranch-2.7+

Penghui

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 9:57 PM PengHui Li  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I want to start a discussion for cherry-picking topic compaction fixes[1]
> into branch-2.7.
> Mainly based on the following considerations:
>
> 1. Without these fixes, the reader will skip data from the compacted topic
> 2. The compactor might skip some data which introduced data lost in some
> cases
> 3. The system topic uses the compacted topic which means without these
> fixes, the topic policy will not work as expected, and we have
> cherry-picked all the topic policy fixes[2] into branch-2.7
>
> Previously, we only cherry-picked these fixes into branch-2.8 and
> branch-2.9.
>
> WDYT?
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.7.6+is%3Aclos[
> …]l%3Acomponent%2Fcompaction+-label%3Acherry-picked%2Fbranch-2.7+
> [2]
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues?page=2&q=label%3Acomponent%2Ftopic-policy+is%3Aclosed
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] bsheltonihs commented on pull request #236: To address the function role vs clusterrole issue

[GitBox]

bsheltonihs commented on pull request #236:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#issuecomment-1047888370


   I believe that I have made the needed changes for it to be backwards 
compatible.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] frankjkelly commented on a change in pull request #236: To address the function role vs clusterrole issue

[GitBox]

frankjkelly commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812069495



##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -777,6 +777,8 @@ broker:
 functions:
   component: functions-worker
 
+  limit_to_namespace: false

Review comment:
   Do we need documentation on how this value should relate to `rbac. 
limit_to_namespace`
   
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/blob/e0e53c1518ae7381013031db1f35ce77f35c27e7/charts/pulsar/values.yaml#L93
   
   Under what use-case would the two values be different?




-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] cmodi-cogito commented on pull request #235: Remove completed init jobs using ttl

[GitBox]

cmodi-cogito commented on pull request #235:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/235#issuecomment-1047925969


   @sijie what are next steps for this PR to be merged ?


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236: To address the function role vs clusterrole issue

[GitBox]

bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812129671



##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -777,6 +777,8 @@ broker:
 functions:
   component: functions-worker
 
+  limit_to_namespace: false

Review comment:
   I would look to those who are experienced committers to determine if 
there should be some guidance/documentation on this. I have no issues providing 
that info and use cases if you want. 
   
   By setting the default ` limit_to_namespace` to be `false` it shouldn't 
impact the current deployments/use cases for those who have the access/ability 
to create `clusterrole` and `clusterrolebinding` would still be able to. By 
setting ` limit_to_namespace` to be `true` it provides the ability to deploy it 
within a namespace by using `role` and `rolebinding`.
   
   One use case for the latter is if you have to restrict tenants to a single 
namespace and thus can't allow access to use `clusterrole` or 
`clusterrolebinding`. Allowing `clusterrole` or `clusterrolebinding` requires 
an elevated level of permissions that reaches beyond just a given namespace. 
   
   By making this change it allows for the use/deployment of functions within a 
namespace just like what was done for the broker within the file 
`broker-cluster-role-binding.yaml`  




-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236: To address the function role vs clusterrole issue

[GitBox]

bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812135669



##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -777,6 +777,8 @@ broker:
 functions:
   component: functions-worker
 
+  limit_to_namespace: false

Review comment:
   I will note that I intentionally placed the attribute under `functions. 
limit_to_namespace` in the `values.yaml`. The logic for this was that I was 
trying to identify that this restricts `role` and `rolebinding` to the 
namespace only for `functions`.




-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] sijie commented on a change in pull request #236: To address the function role vs clusterrole issue

[GitBox]

sijie commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812291367



##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -776,6 +776,11 @@ broker:
 ##
 functions:
   component: functions-worker
+  ## Pulsar: Functions Worker ClusterRole or Role
+  ## templates/broker-rbac.yaml
+  # Default is false which deploys functions with ClusterRole and 
ClusterRoleBinding at the cluster level
+  # Set to true to deploy functions with Role and RoleBinding inside the 
specified namespace
+  limit_to_namespace: false

Review comment:
   @bsheltonihs can you make this setting to be 
`functions.rbac.limit_to_namespace`? it is probably better to be scoped under 
`functions.rbac` so people understand that it is a `rbac` related setting.




-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236: To address the function role vs clusterrole issue

[GitBox]

bsheltonihs commented on a change in pull request #236:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/236#discussion_r812296075



##
File path: charts/pulsar/values.yaml
##
@@ -776,6 +776,11 @@ broker:
 ##
 functions:
   component: functions-worker
+  ## Pulsar: Functions Worker ClusterRole or Role
+  ## templates/broker-rbac.yaml
+  # Default is false which deploys functions with ClusterRole and 
ClusterRoleBinding at the cluster level
+  # Set to true to deploy functions with Role and RoleBinding inside the 
specified namespace
+  limit_to_namespace: false

Review comment:
   took the suggestion/recommendation and moved it under 
`functions.rbac.limit_to_namespace`




-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Pulsar Go Client 0.8.0 released

[Matteo Merli]

It was released correctly, same as all the prev releases:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/pulsar-client-go-0.8.0/
--
Matteo Merli


On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:03 PM Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Did you store the source code tarball on the dist.apache.org website?
>
> For a valid Apache release we must release the source tarball in the
> official repo.
>
>
> Enrico
>
> Il Lun 21 Feb 2022, 04:25 r...@apache.org  ha
> scritto:
>
> > The Apache Pulsar team is proud to announce Apache Pulsar Go Client version
> > 0.8.0.
> >
> > Pulsar is a highly scalable, low latency messaging platform running on
> > commodity hardware. It provides simple pub-sub semantics over topics,
> > guaranteed at-least-once delivery of messages, automatic cursor management
> > for
> > subscribers, and cross-datacenter replication.
> >
> > For Pulsar release details and downloads, visit:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/releases/tag/v0.8.0
> >
> > Release Notes are at:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md
> >
> > We would like to thank the contributors that made the release possible.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > The Pulsar Team
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.2 Candidate 3

[WangJialing]

I found a breaking change in version 2.9.2
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409 

The change is introduced by https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12786
Policies.is_allow_auto_update_schema changed from boolean to Boolean, this may 
cause user's code get NPE.

I'd like to start a discusstion about the solution.

We could add a new interface with `applied` parameter, but this also introduce 
inevitable break change.
And I suggest to do this with PIP in the next major version release.
For version 2.9.2, we need merge 14409 to avoid return null value.



Wangjialing
 
From: Ran Gao
Date: 2022-02-17 02:26
To: dev
Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.2 Candidate 3
This is the third release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.2.
 
*** Please download, test, and vote on this release. This vote will stay
open for at least 72 hours ***
 
Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
convenience.
 
Source and binary files:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.2-candidate-3/
 
SHA-512 checksums:
 
21ab21df057dc181d02806e67a8d85b861fa60a8413a8e4058ffcb738d9ef81d8797c4e7249d50cf2a23c7437cb2880f4240d010a983eda33a2071f5fddf6b01
apache-pulsar-2.9.2-bin.tar.gz
f927d77aba32d1112cd009a1d91a8fca27a49fcb20ea215a5792dc16e2b04bd822238c3f29dd81a7853e20062a0454e2abe608626b24e4e25ff06915b7a04785
apache-pulsar-2.9.2-src.tar.gz
 
Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1141/
 
The tag to be voted upon:
v2.9.2-candidate-3 (5615809ffd68599ae7fec1be0679ee83171f42dc)
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.2-candidate-3
 
Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
 
Please download the source package, and follow the README to build and run
the Pulsar standalone service.

Re: [PIP] #14395 Making SchemaRegistry implementation configurable

[Matteo Merli]

Hi Aparajita,

Thanks for the proposal. Indeed the schema registry was meant to be
pluggable since the beginning although we skipped the actual
"plugging" part. It would be good to actually see multiple
implementations there.

I don't see any risk in this proposal and it's a good time to make
breaking changes to the SchemaRegistry interface since there are not
(yet) any implementation other than the default one.

> Renaming a few methods in the SchemaRegistryService interface to reflect 
> their behavior. The changes are:
> Rename deleteSchema to putEmptySchema in SchemaRegistryService

My only concern, based on current behavior, is that in some places in
the code we're calling `deleteSchema()` while actually we should be
calling `deleteSchemaStorage()` (using the current names). I guess
that's probably due to the misleading nature of the method names. We
should double-check these usages to make sure the expected operation
is applied.

Matteo


--
Matteo Merli


On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 7:53 AM Aparajita Singh
 wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Please review this proposal: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/14395
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Aparajita

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.2 Candidate 3

[PengHui Li]

Looks it will affect the 2.8.3 and 2.10.0 releases,

> We could add a new interface with `applied` parameter, but this also
introduce inevitable break change.
And I suggest to do this with PIP in the next major version release.
For version 2.9.2, we need merge 14409 to avoid return null value.

https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/13831 also is a related PR to fix the
breaking change, and it has merged.
I agree with avoiding the API break change in 2.8.3, 2.9.2, and 2.10.0.
To support get the applied policy of a namespace should start with a PIP,
it might introduce different behavior with
existing API.

Thanks,
Penghui

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 10:44 AM WangJialing <18896728...@139.com> wrote:

> I found a breaking change in version 2.9.2
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409
>
> The change is introduced by https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12786
> Policies.is_allow_auto_update_schema changed from boolean to Boolean, this
> may cause user's code get NPE.
>
> I'd like to start a discusstion about the solution.
>
> We could add a new interface with `applied` parameter, but this also
> introduce inevitable break change.
> And I suggest to do this with PIP in the next major version release.
> For version 2.9.2, we need merge 14409 to avoid return null value.
>
>
>
> Wangjialing
>
> From: Ran Gao
> Date: 2022-02-17 02:26
> To: dev
> Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.2 Candidate 3
> This is the third release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.2.
>
> *** Please download, test, and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> open for at least 72 hours ***
>
> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> convenience.
>
> Source and binary files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.2-candidate-3/
>
> SHA-512 checksums:
>
>
> 21ab21df057dc181d02806e67a8d85b861fa60a8413a8e4058ffcb738d9ef81d8797c4e7249d50cf2a23c7437cb2880f4240d010a983eda33a2071f5fddf6b01
> apache-pulsar-2.9.2-bin.tar.gz
>
> f927d77aba32d1112cd009a1d91a8fca27a49fcb20ea215a5792dc16e2b04bd822238c3f29dd81a7853e20062a0454e2abe608626b24e4e25ff06915b7a04785
> apache-pulsar-2.9.2-src.tar.gz
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1141/
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> v2.9.2-candidate-3 (5615809ffd68599ae7fec1be0679ee83171f42dc)
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.2-candidate-3
>
> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
>
> Please download the source package, and follow the README to build and run
> the Pulsar standalone service.
>

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.0 Candidate 1

[PengHui Li]

Hi all,

This PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14410 fixes a breaking change
in 2.10.0,
without this fix, if users enabled the debug level log and only upgrade the
broker but not the clients,
we will get exception.

I will cherry-pick this one to branch-2.10 and rollout a new RC for 2.10.0.

And https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409 also fixes a breaking
change which discussed
under the 2.9.3 release thread, it also affects the 2.10.0.

Thanks,
Penghui

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 5:14 PM Andras Beni
 wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> Checks done:
>
> - Validated checksums and signatures
>
> - Compiled from source w/ JDK11
>
> - Ran Pulsar standalone and produced-consumed from CLI and validated Java
> functions
>
> Andras
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 4:08 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> > This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.10.0.
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+milestone%3A2.10.0+is%3Amerged+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.1+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.2
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> > open
> > for at least 72 hours ***
> >
> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> > convenience.
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.10.0-candidate-1/
> >
> > SHA-512 checksums:
> >
> >
> >
> 3bd99e0d48c0e7df247b558aa0e0761f4652264948944b4cacbbacf6ee4052a58a73c0869b660359972f91979fd1bef46b0a980f02a8b8cfb193feb076217606
> >  apache-pulsar-2.10.0-bin.tar.gz
> >
> >
> cf3a1c5aa25bc0c8264e8dc4ef53106503c7448aafa9a779e143b07a9426cf58579289930f750748f85910312194b6dc5bd65cded5b0df7b40ae0aca174023ef
> >  apache-pulsar-2.10.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1142/
> >
> > The tag to be voted upon:
> > v2.10.0-candidate-1 (c58e6e8b33a487b6d9dd10410b7620d33ecb994f)
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.10.0-candidate-1
> >
> > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> >
> > Docker images:
> >
> > pulsar:2.10.0 [1]
> > pulsar-all:2.10.0 [2]
> >
> > Please download the source package, and follow the Release Candidate
> > Validation[3]
> > to validate the release
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193225180/lph890127/pulsar/2.10.0/images/sha256-c264084cd34e3952ec4c1f4177c5122251ef39a3af60b7a229851972675706d8?context=repo
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193227776/lph890127/pulsar-all/2.10.0/images/sha256-7e2297dfabbd1d433198c3bc906c09802394da0d41393f2069e515d7131e4be2?context=repo
> > [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.0 Candidate 1

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

Has anyone else found another breaking issue?

Just asking to save Peng Hui time if there is another fix for RC2,

All the best,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 22, 2022, at 8:31 PM, PengHui Li  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> This PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14410 fixes a breaking change
> in 2.10.0,
> without this fix, if users enabled the debug level log and only upgrade the
> broker but not the clients,
> we will get exception.
> 
> I will cherry-pick this one to branch-2.10 and rollout a new RC for 2.10.0.
> 
> And https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409 also fixes a breaking
> change which discussed
> under the 2.9.3 release thread, it also affects the 2.10.0.
> 
> Thanks,
> Penghui
> 
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 5:14 PM Andras Beni
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> +1 (non binding)
>> 
>> Checks done:
>> 
>> - Validated checksums and signatures
>> 
>> - Compiled from source w/ JDK11
>> 
>> - Ran Pulsar standalone and produced-consumed from CLI and validated Java
>> functions
>> 
>> Andras
>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 4:08 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
>>> 
>>> This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.10.0.
>>> 
>>> It fixes the following issues:
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+milestone%3A2.10.0+is%3Amerged+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.1+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.2
>>> 
>>> *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
>>> open
>>> for at least 72 hours ***
>>> 
>>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
>>> convenience.
>>> 
>>> Source and binary files:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.10.0-candidate-1/
>>> 
>>> SHA-512 checksums:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 3bd99e0d48c0e7df247b558aa0e0761f4652264948944b4cacbbacf6ee4052a58a73c0869b660359972f91979fd1bef46b0a980f02a8b8cfb193feb076217606
>>> apache-pulsar-2.10.0-bin.tar.gz
>>> 
>>> 
>> cf3a1c5aa25bc0c8264e8dc4ef53106503c7448aafa9a779e143b07a9426cf58579289930f750748f85910312194b6dc5bd65cded5b0df7b40ae0aca174023ef
>>> apache-pulsar-2.10.0-src.tar.gz
>>> 
>>> Maven staging repo:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1142/
>>> 
>>> The tag to be voted upon:
>>> v2.10.0-candidate-1 (c58e6e8b33a487b6d9dd10410b7620d33ecb994f)
>>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.10.0-candidate-1
>>> 
>>> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
>>> 
>>> Docker images:
>>> 
>>> pulsar:2.10.0 [1]
>>> pulsar-all:2.10.0 [2]
>>> 
>>> Please download the source package, and follow the Release Candidate
>>> Validation[3]
>>> to validate the release
>>> 
>>> [1]
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193225180/lph890127/pulsar/2.10.0/images/sha256-c264084cd34e3952ec4c1f4177c5122251ef39a3af60b7a229851972675706d8?context=repo
>>> [2]
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193227776/lph890127/pulsar-all/2.10.0/images/sha256-7e2297dfabbd1d433198c3bc906c09802394da0d41393f2069e515d7131e4be2?context=repo
>>> [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation
>>> 
>> 

Re: New Pulsar website goes live!

[Sijie Guo]

Yu - Thank you for driving that!

- Sijie

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:06 PM Yu  wrote:

> Hi Sijie,
>
> Thanks for your timely response.
> We're looking into multi-language support and other known issues.
> Will keep the community updated once we make progress.
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 1:07 AM Sijie Guo  wrote:
>
> > Maybe we should roll back to the old website first.
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 8:33 AM Sijie Guo  wrote:
> >
> > > Remove users@
> > >
> > > Yu - I have received quite a few questions about broken links.
> > >
> > > https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/en/security-jwt/ <- This is broken.
> > >
> > > It seems to be me that it is related to multi-language support. Is
> anyone
> > > looking into fixing it?
> > >
> > > - Sijie
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:50 AM Yu  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Thanks Sijie.
> > >>
> > >> Hi Pulsarers,
> > >>
> > >> Since we're switching the website, please DO NOT MERGE DOC RELATED PRS
> > NOW
> > >> until this change [1] gets merged.
> > >> We're working in progress and will keep you updated ASAP.
> > >>
> > >> If you encounter any issues on the new Pulsar website, do not hesitate
> > to
> > >> add it here [2], thanks.
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14344
> > >> [2]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IV35SI_F8G8cL-Vuzknc6RTGLK9_edRMpZpnrHvAWNs/edit#bookmark=id.86uprmy9cv2w
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 12:42 PM Sijie Guo 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi Yu,
> > >> >
> > >> > Thank you and all the other contributors for all the great work!
> Well
> > >> done.
> > >> >
> > >> > - Sijie
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 8:04 PM Yu  wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Thanks for your quick feedback, Penghui and Dianjin.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> As mentioned in the last email, "*...**there are some known issues
> > (eg.
> > >> >> localized pages and some CLI pages are not available). We're fixing
> > >> them*
> > >> >> *...* "
> > >> >>
> > >> >> We'll keep you updated once we resolve them.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:52 AM Dianjin Wang
> > >> >>  wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > Great work!
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Any plans for multi-language translation support? There were some
> > >> >> languages
> > >> >> > supported, such as Chinese, Japanese, French and more, but now
> > cannot
> > >> >> find
> > >> >> > the button in the new website.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Best,
> > >> >> > Dianjin Wang
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:15 AM Yu  wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > Hi Pulsarers,
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > As you may notice, the new Pulsar website goes live!
> > >> >> > > https://pulsar.apache.org/
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > We hope you enjoy the new feature and the fresh appearance!
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > CHANGE: documentation main page URL is changed from
> > >> >> > > https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/en/next/standalone/ to
> > >> >> > > https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/next/.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > It does not affect user experience if you read documentation
> > >> navigated
> > >> >> > > from the Pulsar main page.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Besides, there are some known issues (eg. localized pages and
> > some
> > >> CLI
> > >> >> > > pages are not available). We're fixing them. Feel free to join
> us
> > >> or
> > >> >> make
> > >> >> > > comments, thanks!
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Special thanks go to @urfreespace and @dave2wave to make this
> > >> happen!
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Anonymitaet
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.0 Candidate 1

[PengHui Li]

Thanks Dave,

Yes, this is also what I want to ask, I have checked all the current opened
PRs and the current merged PRs
Looks no other related breaking change fixes. I think we'd better keep the
VOTE open for 2 days?

Thanks,
Penghui

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 1:03 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:

> Hi -
>
> Has anyone else found another breaking issue?
>
> Just asking to save Peng Hui time if there is another fix for RC2,
>
> All the best,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 22, 2022, at 8:31 PM, PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > This PR https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14410 fixes a breaking
> change
> > in 2.10.0,
> > without this fix, if users enabled the debug level log and only upgrade
> the
> > broker but not the clients,
> > we will get exception.
> >
> > I will cherry-pick this one to branch-2.10 and rollout a new RC for
> 2.10.0.
> >
> > And https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409 also fixes a breaking
> > change which discussed
> > under the 2.9.3 release thread, it also affects the 2.10.0.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Penghui
> >
> >> On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 5:14 PM Andras Beni
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 (non binding)
> >>
> >> Checks done:
> >>
> >> - Validated checksums and signatures
> >>
> >> - Compiled from source w/ JDK11
> >>
> >> - Ran Pulsar standalone and produced-consumed from CLI and validated
> Java
> >> functions
> >>
> >> Andras
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 4:08 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.10.0.
> >>>
> >>> It fixes the following issues:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+milestone%3A2.10.0+is%3Amerged+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.1+-label%3Arelease%2F2.9.2
> >>>
> >>> *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> >>> open
> >>> for at least 72 hours ***
> >>>
> >>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
> for
> >>> convenience.
> >>>
> >>> Source and binary files:
> >>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.10.0-candidate-1/
> >>>
> >>> SHA-512 checksums:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> 3bd99e0d48c0e7df247b558aa0e0761f4652264948944b4cacbbacf6ee4052a58a73c0869b660359972f91979fd1bef46b0a980f02a8b8cfb193feb076217606
> >>> apache-pulsar-2.10.0-bin.tar.gz
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> cf3a1c5aa25bc0c8264e8dc4ef53106503c7448aafa9a779e143b07a9426cf58579289930f750748f85910312194b6dc5bd65cded5b0df7b40ae0aca174023ef
> >>> apache-pulsar-2.10.0-src.tar.gz
> >>>
> >>> Maven staging repo:
> >>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1142/
> >>>
> >>> The tag to be voted upon:
> >>> v2.10.0-candidate-1 (c58e6e8b33a487b6d9dd10410b7620d33ecb994f)
> >>> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.10.0-candidate-1
> >>>
> >>> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> >>>
> >>> Docker images:
> >>>
> >>> pulsar:2.10.0 [1]
> >>> pulsar-all:2.10.0 [2]
> >>>
> >>> Please download the source package, and follow the Release Candidate
> >>> Validation[3]
> >>> to validate the release
> >>>
> >>> [1]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193225180/lph890127/pulsar/2.10.0/images/sha256-c264084cd34e3952ec4c1f4177c5122251ef39a3af60b7a229851972675706d8?context=repo
> >>> [2]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://hub.docker.com/layers/193227776/lph890127/pulsar-all/2.10.0/images/sha256-7e2297dfabbd1d433198c3bc906c09802394da0d41393f2069e515d7131e4be2?context=repo
> >>> [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation
> >>>
> >>
>
>

[DISCUSS] Dismiss Stale Code Reviews

[Michael Marshall]

Hi All,

In my recent PR to update the `.asf.yaml` to protect release branches,
I set the `dismiss_stale_reviews` to `true` for PRs targeting master
branch [0]. I mistakenly thought this setting would only dismiss PRs
updated by force. Instead, all approvals are dismissed when additional
commits are added to the PR. The GitHub feature is documented here
[1].

Since the PR changed the old setting, I want to bring awareness to the
change and determine our preferred behavior before changing the
setting again.

I think we should return to our old setting [2]. The GitHub PR history
clearly shows when a contributor/committer approved a PR. I feel that
it is up to the "merging" committer to give the final review of the
PR's approval history before merging. Further, when dismiss stale code
reviews is true, GitHub modifies previous approval "history" in the PR
making it look like a reviewer never approved the PR, which I find a
bit confusing.

Here is a sample PR where approvals were dismissed: [3].

Let me know how you think we should proceed.

Thanks,
Michael

[0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/.asf.yaml#L76
[1] 
https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/configuring-branches-and-merges-in-your-repository/defining-the-mergeability-of-pull-requests/managing-a-branch-protection-rule#creating-a-branch-protection-rule
[2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14425
[3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409

Re: [DISCUSS] Dismiss Stale Code Reviews

[PengHui Li]

+1

Before I always thought it was Github added this new feature :)
Thanks for sharing the great knowledge.

Penghui

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 2:24 PM Michael Marshall 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> In my recent PR to update the `.asf.yaml` to protect release branches,
> I set the `dismiss_stale_reviews` to `true` for PRs targeting master
> branch [0]. I mistakenly thought this setting would only dismiss PRs
> updated by force. Instead, all approvals are dismissed when additional
> commits are added to the PR. The GitHub feature is documented here
> [1].
>
> Since the PR changed the old setting, I want to bring awareness to the
> change and determine our preferred behavior before changing the
> setting again.
>
> I think we should return to our old setting [2]. The GitHub PR history
> clearly shows when a contributor/committer approved a PR. I feel that
> it is up to the "merging" committer to give the final review of the
> PR's approval history before merging. Further, when dismiss stale code
> reviews is true, GitHub modifies previous approval "history" in the PR
> making it look like a reviewer never approved the PR, which I find a
> bit confusing.
>
> Here is a sample PR where approvals were dismissed: [3].
>
> Let me know how you think we should proceed.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
> [0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/.asf.yaml#L76
> [1]
> https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/configuring-branches-and-merges-in-your-repository/defining-the-mergeability-of-pull-requests/managing-a-branch-protection-rule#creating-a-branch-protection-rule
> [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14425
> [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409
>

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.8.3 Candidate 2

[Michael Marshall]

Thank you all for your votes.

As discussed in the 2.9.3 release vote thread, this release candidate
is affected by a breaking change that will be fixed by
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14409. Please see that thread
for details.

Please let me know if anyone has identified additional regressions in
2.8.3. Assuming we're able to get 14409 merged soon and there are no
other issues, I plan to start building the artifacts for RC 3 in about
12 hours.

Thanks,
Michael

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 5:46 PM Hiroyuki Sakai  wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>  - Check signatures/checksums
>  - Check the license headers
>  - build sources
>  - Validate Pub/Sub and Java Functions
>  - Validate Stateful Functions
>
> Regards,
> Hiroyuki
> 
> From: Michael Marshall 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 13:34
> To: Dev 
> Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.8.3 Candidate 2
>
> This is the second release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.8.3.
>
> It fixes the following issues:
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v2.8.2...v2.8.3-candidate-2
>
> *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay open
> for at least 72 hours ***
>
> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> convenience.
>
> Source and binary files:
> https://jpn01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fpulsar%2Fpulsar-2.8.3-candidate-2%2F&data=04%7C01%7Chsakai%40yahoo-corp.jp%7Ca8fe8c7e019c4e459fd908d9f105bbbf%7Ca208d369cd4e4f87b11998eaf31df2c3%7C1%7C0%7C637805829181797628%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=W%2BIhAT7C7VUnFDX2fo3QNDMjNPjMtA9x2wtq3dT8LaI%3D&reserved=0
>
> SHA-512 checksums:
>
> aa9fb934260e158fe6a30208324459dd747d32fbb52ee61a28a322c6161f3e21d2e97f61118ee0e82488720f7c7787233949ef9eb80567b83896f08b12c54090
>  ./apache-pulsar-2.8.3-bin.tar.gz
> 47747e2cdc323c00fcdd08c537c77f355a94fbfaee77789718cb70e52726b7084522a842505e7eff1c1be26fddc850f2134d400a803854286ac8ea2f7cada121
>  ./apache-pulsar-2.8.3-src.tar.gz
>
> Unofficial Docker images:
> michaelmarshall/pulsar:2.8.3-rc2
> michaelmarshall/pulsar-all:2.8.3-rc2
> michaelmarshall/pulsar-standalone:2.8.3-rc2
> michaelmarshall/pulsar-grafana:2.8.3-rc2
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://jpn01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2Fcontent%2Frepositories%2Forgapachepulsar-1140%2F&data=04%7C01%7Chsakai%40yahoo-corp.jp%7Ca8fe8c7e019c4e459fd908d9f105bbbf%7Ca208d369cd4e4f87b11998eaf31df2c3%7C1%7C0%7C637805829181797628%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=3sM8TGEJwt70ik8v6hl5uyuGYJd6j%2FtxjTB8xQemjmg%3D&reserved=0
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> v2.8.3-candidate-2 (83a522f3a17d41eb3727ffee67cdf035e8ea471b)
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.8.3-candidate-2
>
> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://jpn01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fpulsar%2FKEYS&data=04%7C01%7Chsakai%40yahoo-corp.jp%7Ca8fe8c7e019c4e459fd908d9f105bbbf%7Ca208d369cd4e4f87b11998eaf31df2c3%7C1%7C0%7C637805829181797628%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=wraauf84PQlSMS1fAaiQcYOtKIa8Z1zRHtwtm%2F902Is%3D&reserved=0
>
> Please download the source package, and follow the README to build
> and run the Pulsar standalone service.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Pulsar Go Client 0.8.0 released

[Enrico Olivelli]

Il Mar 22 Feb 2022, 22:55 Matteo Merli  ha scritto:

> It was released correctly, same as all the prev releases:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/pulsar/pulsar-client-go-0.8.0/


Thanks
Enrico


> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:03 PM Enrico Olivelli 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > Did you store the source code tarball on the dist.apache.org website?
> >
> > For a valid Apache release we must release the source tarball in the
> > official repo.
> >
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il Lun 21 Feb 2022, 04:25 r...@apache.org  ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > The Apache Pulsar team is proud to announce Apache Pulsar Go Client
> version
> > > 0.8.0.
> > >
> > > Pulsar is a highly scalable, low latency messaging platform running on
> > > commodity hardware. It provides simple pub-sub semantics over topics,
> > > guaranteed at-least-once delivery of messages, automatic cursor
> management
> > > for
> > > subscribers, and cross-datacenter replication.
> > >
> > > For Pulsar release details and downloads, visit:
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/releases/tag/v0.8.0
> > >
> > > Release Notes are at:
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md
> > >
> > > We would like to thank the contributors that made the release possible.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > The Pulsar Team
> > >
>

Re: Pulsar - Transaction Message Detail Question

[PengHui Li]

Hi Yutao,

Thanks for your feedback.

Yes, the current implementation is the marker approach.
And the transaction buffer is an interface, in fact, this
does not limit we can only have one approach.

When we implement the sidecar approach, the biggest
challenge is mapping the message ID to the entry of the
transaction commit marker, as described in the proposal,
we need an extra index to make it work and the sidecar
approach will also double the number of managed ledgers,
which will bring more burden to Zookeeper.

There are indeed some details that we did not update back
to the proposal, we will prepare this part to update it back to PIP.

Thanks,
Penghui

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 11:51 PM yutao chen  wrote:

> Hi, I'm very interested in Pulsar transaction message, and I found this
> issue 
> Would you please tell me why pulsar finally chose to replace sidecar's
> appraoch with marker's appraoch, which seems different from the conclusion
> in the previous PIP-31
> <
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/145VYp09JKTw9jAT-7yNyFU255FptB2_B2Fye100ZXDI/edit#
> >
>

[GitHub] [pulsar-client-node] larshp opened a new issue #195: Documentation for ClientConfig parameters?

[GitBox]

larshp opened a new issue #195:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/issues/195


   Hi,
   There are multiple parameter settings for the ClientConfig,
   
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/blob/d2c0d1e374f8e9f25934bd679436da0872b6bc8e/index.d.ts#L25-L33
   
   Is the documentation for these parameters available somewhere? Ideally I'd 
suggest adding some comments directly in the typescript definition, so users of 
the library can see some documentation while developing.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org