Jenkins build is still unstable: Kafka » Kafka Branch Builder » trunk #663

See

Jenkins build is still unstable: Kafka » Kafka Branch Builder » 3.1 #73

See

Jenkins build is still unstable: Kafka » Kafka Branch Builder » trunk #662

See

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-816: Topology changes without local state reset

Hello all, Thanks for the KIP, Nick! Based on this conversation, I think I might have misread the KIP, but it looks like Nick is just proposing a small fix to the existing compatability mechanism. Although we tell people to avoid changing topologies on the fly in general, we also tell them that,

Re: [DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

Hi Nikolay, That's a good question! But I think for stale KIP, we should have another discussion thread. In my opinion, I agree we should also have similar mechanism for KIP. Currently, the state of KIP has "under discussion", "voting", and "accepted". The KIP might stay in "discussion" or "votin

Re: [DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

Hello, David, Luke. What about KIPs? Should we have some special state on KIPs that was rejected or can’t be implemented due to lack of design or when Kafka goes in another direction? Right now those kind of KIPs just have no feedback. For me as a contributor it’s not clear - what is wrong with t

Re: [DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

Hi David, I agree with it! This is also a good way to let both parties (code author and reviewers) know there's a PR is not active anymore. Should we continue it or close it directly? In my opinion, 1 year is too long, half a year should be long enough. Thank you. Luke On Sat, Feb 5, 2022 at 8:

Re: [DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

Hey David, That's a great idea.. Just to stress your point, this keeps both parties informed if a PR has become stale. So, the reviewer would know that there was some PR which was being reviewed but due to inactivity it got closed so maybe time to relook and similarly the submitter. And yeah, any

[DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

Hi team, I find our ever growing back of PRs a little frustrating, don't you? I just made a pass over all the list and a huge chunk of the PRs are abandoned, outdated or irrelevant with the current code base. For instance, we still have PRs opened back in 2015. There is not a Github Action [1] fo