Since we already have three binding +1s for this KIP, I'm closing this
thread as accepted and updating the KIP wiki accordingly.
Guozhang
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> +1 for the KIP and Rename
>
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 5:51 AM Bill Bejeck wrote:
>
> > +1 for the KI
+1 for the KIP and Rename
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 5:51 AM Bill Bejeck wrote:
> +1 for the KIP and +1 on renaming "range" to "fetchAll"
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
>
> > BTW, Xavier has an argument to rename "range" as it does not take a key
> or
+1 for the KIP and +1 on renaming "range" to "fetchAll"
Thanks,
Bill
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
> BTW, Xavier has an argument to rename "range" as it does not take a key or
> key range at all. I'd propose we rename this function to "fetchAll".
>
> Guozhang
>
> On Wed,
BTW, Xavier has an argument to rename "range" as it does not take a key or
key range at all. I'd propose we rename this function to "fetchAll".
Guozhang
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Damian Guy wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 at 16:46 Guozhang Wang wrote:
>
> > +1. Thanks.
> >
> > On Mo
+1
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 at 16:46 Guozhang Wang wrote:
> +1. Thanks.
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Richard Yu
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I want to propose KIP-205 for the addition of new API. It is about adding
> > methods similar to those found in ReadOnlyKeyValueStore to the
> > Read
+1. Thanks.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Richard Yu
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I want to propose KIP-205 for the addition of new API. It is about adding
> methods similar to those found in ReadOnlyKeyValueStore to the
> ReadOnlyWindowStore class. As it appears the discussion has reached a
> conclu
