Hi Pierre, My take is that it is unlikely that KAFKA-3006 can be part of 0.9.0.1 as KIP-45 is still being discussed. Also, the compatibility implications mean that 0.9.1.0 is a more likely target.
Ismael On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Pierre-Yves Ritschard <p...@spootnik.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Since it's still early in 0.9.0.0's life, if KAFKA-3006 has a chance of > making the cut (provided a resolution is attained on the KIP-45) it would > be great to avoid leaving too much time for code relying on Arrays to > become common place. > > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 12:05 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote: > > > Hi Allen, > > > > As the JIRA says, KAFKA-3100 has already been integrated into the 0.9.0 > > branch and will be part of 0.9.0.1. > > > > Ismael > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Allen Wang <allenxw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi Jun, > > > > > > What about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3100? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Allen > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Becket, > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Becket Qin <becket....@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I am taking KAFKA-3177 off the list because the correct fix might > > > involve > > > > > some refactoring of exception hierarchy in new consumer. That may > > take > > > > some > > > > > time and 0.9.0.1 probably does not need to block on it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds good to me. > > > > > > > > Ismael > > > > > > > > > >
