KIP 321 has passed.
Here is the vote break down:
Binding:
- Matthias J. Sax
- Guozhang Wong
- Ewen Cheslack-Postava
Non-Binding:
- Ted Yu
- Bill Bejeck
- Damian Guy
Thanks to all those who voted and provided feedback!
Best,
Nishanth Pradeep
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 12:42 PM
I agree with Guozhang.
Breaking compatibility is not acceptable.
If we want the change to use `Optional`, we should deprecate the current
method and explain that it return type will change in next major release
3.0.0 and create a ticket for this change that we can tackle when time
comes.
-Matt
I think leaving the current return value to be null-able is okay, as long
as it is well documented in java doc.
Guozhang
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Damian Guy wrote:
> You have 3 binding votes, so i'll defer to the others.
>
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 04:41 Nishanth Pradeep
> wrote:
>
> > T
You have 3 binding votes, so i'll defer to the others.
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 04:41 Nishanth Pradeep wrote:
> The only issue I see with this is that Sink#topic would also need to be
> Optional as was pointed out already. Since Sink#topic is a preexisting
> method, changing its return type would b
The only issue I see with this is that Sink#topic would also need to be
Optional as was pointed out already. Since Sink#topic is a preexisting
method, changing its return type would break backwards compatibility.
On the other hand, it might be worth it to rip that bandaid now.
Best,
Nishanth Prad
For source node, only one of `Set topicsSet` and `TopicPattern
topicPattern()` will be specified by the user. Similarly for sink node,
only one of `String` and `TopicNameExtractor` will be specified by the
user. Although I've not seen Nishanth's updated PR, I think when it is not
specified today we
Ewen - no as I don't believe they are never null. Whereas the
topicNameExtractor method returns null if it is the default extractor or
the extractor. So i think this would be better to be optional as it is
optionally returning a TopicNameExtractor
On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 at 23:01 Ewen Cheslack-Postava
Generally +1 (binding)
It would be helpful to just provide the full, updated interfaces in the KIP
and mark things as new with comments if needed. I had to go back and read
the discussion thread to make sure I was understanding the intent correctly.
Damian -- if we make that Optional, shouldn't t
Hi Nishanth,
I have one nit on the KIP. I think the topicNameExtractor method should
return Optional rather than null.
Sorry I'm late here.
Thanks,
Damian
On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 at 01:14 Nishanth Pradeep wrote:
> We need one more binding vote.
>
> Binding Votes:
>
>- Matthias J. Sax
>- Gu
We need one more binding vote.
Binding Votes:
- Matthias J. Sax
- Guozhang Wong
Community Votes:
- Bill Bejeck
- Ted Yu
Best,
Nishanth Pradeep
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:02 AM Bill Bejeck wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP!
>
> +1
>
> -Bill
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:39 AM Guozhang
Thanks for the KIP!
+1
-Bill
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:39 AM Guozhang Wang wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:13 PM, Matthias J. Sax
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> > On 7/25/18 7:47 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 7:24 PM Nishanth Pr
+1
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:13 PM, Matthias J. Sax
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 7/25/18 7:47 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 7:24 PM Nishanth Pradeep
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I'm calling a vote for KIP-321:
> >>
> >>
> >> https://cwiki.apache
+1 (binding)
-Matthias
On 7/25/18 7:47 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 7:24 PM Nishanth Pradeep
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm calling a vote for KIP-321:
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-321%3A+Update+TopologyDescription+to+better+represent+Sou
+1
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 7:24 PM Nishanth Pradeep
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm calling a vote for KIP-321:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-321%3A+Update+TopologyDescription+to+better+represent+Source+and+Sink+Nodes
>
> Best,
> Nishanth Pradeep
>
Hello,
I'm calling a vote for KIP-321:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-321%3A+Update+TopologyDescription+to+better+represent+Source+and+Sink+Nodes
Best,
Nishanth Pradeep
15 matches
Mail list logo
