Hi everyone,
Thanks for participating in the discussion and voting.
I'm closing this vote with three binding +1 and zero -1 votes.
Binding +1
- Luke Chen
- Tom Bently
- Mickael Maison
Non-Binding +1
- Ivan Yurchenko
- Josep Prat
- Igor Soarez
I have rebased the PR against trunk at
https://github
Hi Matthew,
+1 (binding)
Thanks,
Mickael
On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 3:31 PM Igor Soarez wrote:
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
> Thanks for submitting this KIP.
> This is a useful improvement.
> +1 non binding
>
> Best,
>
> --
> Igor
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022, at 12:01 PM, Tom Bentley wrote:
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
>
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for submitting this KIP.
This is a useful improvement.
+1 non binding
Best,
--
Igor
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022, at 12:01 PM, Tom Bentley wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Tom
>
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 12:15, Matthew de Detrich
> wrot
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
Kind regards,
Tom
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 12:15, Matthew de Detrich
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for the response.
>
> > 1. In the public interface section, could we spell out
> the configurations that we are changing with this
> KIP? The name doe
Hi David,
Thanks for the response.
> 1. In the public interface section, could we spell out
the configurations that we are changing with this
KIP? The name does not change but the semantic is
so it is good to be clear.
Done
> 2. In the proposed changes section, I would rather
mention the config
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the KIP. I have a few minor comments:
1. In the public interface section, could we spell out
the configurations that we are changing with this
KIP? The name does not change but the semantic is
so it is good to be clear.
2. In the proposed changes section, I would rather
me
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the update.
I'm +1 (binding)
Thank you.
Luke
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 3:32 PM Matthew de Detrich
wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
> I have just updated the KIP with the changes you requested.
>
> Regards
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 4:47 AM Luke Chen wrote:
>
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
> > I
Hi Luke,
I have just updated the KIP with the changes you requested.
Regards
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 4:47 AM Luke Chen wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> I checked again the KIP, and it LGTM.
>
> Just a minor comment:
> Maybe add some examples into the KIP to show how users can set both IPv4
> and IPv6
Hi Matthew,
I checked again the KIP, and it LGTM.
Just a minor comment:
Maybe add some examples into the KIP to show how users can set both IPv4
and IPv6 on the same port.
And some examples to show how the validation will fail like you listed in
`Proposed Changes`.
Thank you.
Luke
On Fri, Feb
Hello everyone
I have just updated/rebased the PR against the latest Kafka trunk. Let me
know if anything else is required/missing.
Regards
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 10:28 AM Matthew de Detrich <
matthew.dedetr...@aiven.io> wrote:
> Does anyone have any additional comments/regards to help get thi
Does anyone have any additional comments/regards to help get this PR voted
through?
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 7:46 AM Josep Prat
wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> Thank you for the PR.
>
> +1 (non binding) from my side.
>
>
> Best,
>
> ———
> Josep Prat
>
> Aiven Deutschland GmbH
>
> Immanuelkirchstraße 26,
Hi Matthew,
Thank you for the PR.
+1 (non binding) from my side.
Best,
———
Josep Prat
Aiven Deutschland GmbH
Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B
Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen
m: +491715557497
w: aiven.io
e: josep.p...@aiven.
Hi,
Thank you for the KIP.
+1 (non-binding)
Ivan
On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 at 04:18, Luke Chen wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
> Thanks for the KIP.
> It makes sense to allow IPv4 and IPv6 listening on the same port for the
> listener config.
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thank you.
> Luke
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 202
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the KIP.
It makes sense to allow IPv4 and IPv6 listening on the same port for the
listener config.
+1 (non-binding)
Thank you.
Luke
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 6:28 PM Matthew de Detrich
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I would like to start a vote for KIP-797: Accept duplicate
Hello everyone,
I would like to start a vote for KIP-797: Accept duplicate listener on port
for IPv4/IPv6
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=195726330
The purpose of the KIP is to loosen current validation for non advertised
listeners so that you can have an IPv4 ad
15 matches
Mail list logo
