apoorvmittal10 merged PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536
--
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: jira-unsubscr...@kafka.
apoorvmittal10 commented on code in PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#discussion_r2058343469
##
clients/src/main/resources/common/message/ShareFetchResponse.json:
##
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
{ "name": "LeaderEpoch", "type": "int32", "versions": "0+",
AndrewJSchofield commented on code in PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#discussion_r2056803791
##
clients/src/main/resources/common/message/ShareFetchResponse.json:
##
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
{ "name": "LeaderEpoch", "type": "int32", "versions": "0+
AndrewJSchofield commented on code in PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#discussion_r2056411867
##
clients/src/main/resources/common/message/ShareFetchResponse.json:
##
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
{ "name": "LeaderEpoch", "type": "int32", "versions": "0+
chia7712 commented on code in PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#discussion_r2056430013
##
clients/src/main/resources/common/message/ShareFetchResponse.json:
##
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
{ "name": "LeaderEpoch", "type": "int32", "versions": "0+",
frankvicky commented on PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#issuecomment-2824001459
Make sense to me.
We also need to update the KIP and notify the original email thread.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, pleas
AndrewJSchofield commented on PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#issuecomment-2823979534
> Thanks @frankvicky. @AndrewJSchofield What do you think, should I remove
the nullable and then later we update the KIP-932 or leave for future?
My view is that we remove
apoorvmittal10 commented on PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#issuecomment-2823820686
Thanks @frankvicky. @AndrewJSchofield What do you think, should I remove the
nullable and then later we update the KIP-932 or leave for future?
--
This is an automated message f
AndrewJSchofield commented on PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#issuecomment-2822398563
> So in this PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19131/files the field
was made nullable again. I aligned the changes as per regular Fetch behaviour.
I know there was
apoorvmittal10 commented on PR #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536#issuecomment-2822302346
> Should the `records` field in the `ShareFetchResponse.json` be
non-nullable too? I notice that it permits nulls.
So in this PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19131/f
apoorvmittal10 opened a new pull request, #19536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19536
This PR marks the records as non-nullable for ShareFetch.
This PR is as per the changes for Fetch:
https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/18726 and some work for ShareFetch was
done here:
11 matches
Mail list logo