Hi Sophie,
Please feel free to add that to 3.6 branch as you say this is a minor
change and will not cause any regressions.

Thanks,
Satish.

On Sat, 2 Sept 2023 at 08:44, Sophie Blee-Goldman
<ableegold...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Satish, someone reported a minor bug in the Streams application
> shutdown which was a recent regression, though not strictly a new one: was
> introduced in 3.4 I believe.
>
> The fix seems to be super lightweight and low-risk so I was hoping to slip
> it into 3.6 if that's ok with you? They plan to have the patch tonight.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15429
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 5:45 PM Satish Duggana <satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Chris for bringing this issue here and filing the new JIRA for
> > 3.6.0[1]. It seems to be a blocker for 3.6.0.
> >
> > Please help review https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14314 as Chris
> > requested.
> >
> > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15425
> >
> > ~Satish.
> >
> > On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 03:59, Chris Egerton <chr...@aiven.io.invalid>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Quick update: I've filed a separate ticket,
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15425, to track the behavior
> > > change in Admin::listOffsets. For the full history of the ticket, it's
> > > worth reading the comment thread on the old ticket at
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12879.
> > >
> > > I've also published https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14314 as a
> > fairly
> > > lightweight PR to revert the behavior of Admin::listOffsets without also
> > > reverting the refactoring to use the internal admin driver API. Would
> > > appreciate a review on that if anyone can spare the cycles.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 1:01 PM Chris Egerton <chr...@aiven.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Satish,
> > > >
> > > > Wanted to let you know that KAFKA-12879 (
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12879), a breaking change
> > in
> > > > Admin::listOffsets, has been reintroduced into the code base. Since we
> > > > haven't yet published a release with this change (at least, not the
> > more
> > > > recent instance of it), I was hoping we could treat it as a blocker for
> > > > 3.6.0. I'd also like to solicit the input of people familiar with the
> > admin
> > > > client to weigh in on the Jira ticket about whether we should continue
> > to
> > > > preserve the current behavior (if the consensus is that we should, I'm
> > > > happy to file a fix).
> > > >
> > > > Please let me know if you agree that this qualifies as a blocker. I
> > plan
> > > > on publishing a potential fix sometime this week.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 9:19 AM Satish Duggana <
> > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >> Please plan to continue merging pull requests associated with any
> > > >> outstanding minor features and stabilization changes to 3.6 branch
> > > >> before September 3rd. Kindly update the KIP's implementation status in
> > > >> the 3.6.0 release notes.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Satish.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 21:37, Justine Olshan
> > > >> <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Hey Satish,
> > > >> > Everything should be in 3.6, and I will update the release plan
> > wiki.
> > > >> > Thanks!
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 4:08 AM Satish Duggana <
> > > >> satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi Justine,
> > > >> > > Adding KIP-890 part-1 to 3.6.0 seems reasonable to me. This part
> > looks
> > > >> > > to be addressing a critical issue of consumers getting stuck.
> > Please
> > > >> > > update the release plan wiki and merge all the required changes
> > to 3.6
> > > >> > > branch.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > Satish.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 22:19, Justine Olshan
> > > >> > > <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Hey Satish,
> > > >> > > > Does it make sense to include KIP-890 part 1? It prevents
> > hanging
> > > >> > > > transactions for older clients. (An optimization and stronger
> > EOS
> > > >> > > > guarantees will be included in part 2)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > Justine
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 3:29 AM Satish Duggana <
> > > >> satish.dugg...@gmail.com
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > Hi,
> > > >> > > > > 3.6 branch is created. Please make sure any PRs targeted for
> > 3.6.0
> > > >> > > > > should be merged to 3.6 branch once those are merged to trunk.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > Satish.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 15:58, Satish Duggana <
> > > >> satish.dugg...@gmail.com
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Hi,
> > > >> > > > > > Please plan to merge PRs(including the major features)
> > targeted
> > > >> for
> > > >> > > > > > 3.6.0 by the end of Aug 20th UTC. Starting from August 21st,
> > > >> any pull
> > > >> > > > > > requests intended for the 3.6.0 release must include the
> > changes
> > > >> > > > > > merged into the 3.6 branch as mentioned in the release plan.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > Satish.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 at 18:39, Chris Egerton
> > > >> <chr...@aiven.io.invalid>
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for adding KIP-949, Satish!
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 7:06 AM Satish Duggana <
> > > >> > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > >> > > > > > > > Myself and Divij discussed and added the wiki for Kafka
> > > >> > > TieredStorage
> > > >> > > > > > > > Early Access Release[1]. If you have any comments or
> > > >> feedback,
> > > >> > > please
> > > >> > > > > > > > feel free to share them.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > 1.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Tiered+Storage+Early+Access+Release+Notes
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > > > Satish.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 at 08:40, Satish Duggana <
> > > >> > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi Chris,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Thanks for the update. This looks to be a minor change
> > > >> and is
> > > >> > > also
> > > >> > > > > > > > > useful for backward compatibility. I added it to the
> > > >> release
> > > >> > > plan
> > > >> > > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > > an exceptional case.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > ~Satish.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 at 21:34, Chris Egerton
> > > >> > > <chr...@aiven.io.invalid
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hi Satish,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Would it be possible to include KIP-949 (
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-949%3A+Add+flag+to+enable+the+usage+of+topic+separator+in+MM2+DefaultReplicationPolicy
> > > >> > > > > > > > )
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > in the 3.6.0 release? It passed voting yesterday,
> > and
> > > >> is a
> > > >> > > very
> > > >> > > > > small,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > low-risk change that we'd like to put out as soon as
> > > >> > > possible in
> > > >> > > > > order
> > > >> > > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > patch an accidental break in backwards compatibility
> > > >> caused
> > > >> > > a few
> > > >> > > > > > > > versions
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > ago.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Chris
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 2:35 AM Satish Duggana <
> > > >> > > > > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Whoever has KIP entries in the 3.6.0 release plan.
> > > >> Please
> > > >> > > > > update it
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > with the latest status by tomorrow(end of the day
> > > >> 29th Jul
> > > >> > > UTC
> > > >> > > > > ).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Satish.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 12:01, Satish Duggana <
> > > >> > > > > > > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Ismael and Divij for the suggestions.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > One way was to follow the earlier guidelines
> > that
> > > >> we set
> > > >> > > for
> > > >> > > > > any
> > > >> > > > > > > > early
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > access release. It looks Ismael already
> > mentioned
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > example of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > KRaft.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > KIP-405 mentions upgrade/downgrade and
> > limitations
> > > >> > > sections.
> > > >> > > > > We can
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > clarify that in the release notes for users on
> > how
> > > >> this
> > > >> > > > > feature
> > > >> > > > > > > > can be
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > used for early access.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Divij, We do not want users to enable this
> > feature
> > > >> on
> > > >> > > > > production
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > environments in early access release. Let us
> > work
> > > >> > > together
> > > >> > > > > on the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > followups Ismael suggested.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ~Satish.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 02:24, Divij Vaidya <
> > > >> > > > > > > > divijvaidy...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Those are great suggestions, thank you. We
> > will
> > > >> > > continue
> > > >> > > > > this
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > discussion
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > forward in a separate KIP for release plan for
> > > >> Tiered
> > > >> > > > > Storage.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu 27. Jul 2023 at 21:46, Ismael Juma <
> > > >> > > > > m...@ismaeljuma.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Divij,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the points you bring up for
> > discussion
> > > >> are
> > > >> > > all
> > > >> > > > > good.
> > > >> > > > > > > > My main
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > feedback is that they should be discussed
> > in the
> > > >> > > context
> > > >> > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > > KIPs vs
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > release template. That's why we have a
> > backwards
> > > >> > > > > compatibility
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > section for
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > every KIP, it's precisely to ensure we think
> > > >> > > carefully
> > > >> > > > > about
> > > >> > > > > > > > some of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > points you're bringing up. When it comes to
> > > >> defining
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > meaning of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > early
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > access, we have two options:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Have a KIP specifically for tiered
> > storage.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Have a KIP to define general guidelines
> > for
> > > >> what
> > > >> > > early
> > > >> > > > > > > > access
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > means.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does this make sense?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ismael
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 6:38 PM Divij
> > Vaidya <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > divijvaidy...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the response, Ismael.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Specifically in context of 3.6, I
> > wanted
> > > >> this
> > > >> > > > > > > > compatibility
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guarantee point to encourage a discussion
> > on
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-952%3A+Regenerate+segment-aligned+producer+snapshots+when+upgrading+to+a+Kafka+version+supporting+Tiered+Storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Due to lack of producer snapshots in <2.8
> > > >> > > versions, a
> > > >> > > > > > > > customer may
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be able to upgrade to 3.6 and use TS on a
> > > >> topic
> > > >> > > which
> > > >> > > > > was
> > > >> > > > > > > > created
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > when
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the cluster was on <2.8 version (see
> > > >> motivation for
> > > >> > > > > > > > details). We
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > can
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discuss and agree that it does not break
> > > >> > > compatibility,
> > > >> > > > > > > > which is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > fine.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I want to ensure that we have a
> > discussion
> > > >> > > soon on
> > > >> > > > > this
> > > >> > > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > reach a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conclusion.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. I will start a KIP on this for further
> > > >> > > discussion.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. In the context of 3.6, this would mean
> > that
> > > >> > > there
> > > >> > > > > should
> > > >> > > > > > > > be
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no-regression, if a user does "not"
> > turn-on
> > > >> remote
> > > >> > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > (early
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > access feature) at a cluster level. We
> > have
> > > >> some
> > > >> > > known
> > > >> > > > > cases
> > > >> > > > > > > > (such
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15189)
> > > >> > > > > which
> > > >> > > > > > > > violate
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > this
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compatibility requirement. Having this
> > > >> guarantee
> > > >> > > > > mentioned
> > > >> > > > > > > > in the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > release plan will ensure that we are all
> > in
> > > >> > > agreement
> > > >> > > > > with
> > > >> > > > > > > > which
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > cases
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are truly blockers and which aren't.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Fair, instead of a general goal, let me
> > > >> put it
> > > >> > > > > > > > specifically in
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > context of 3.6. Let me know if this is
> > not the
> > > >> > > right
> > > >> > > > > forum
> > > >> > > > > > > > for this
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussion.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once a user "turns on" tiered storage
> > (TS) at
> > > >> a
> > > >> > > cluster
> > > >> > > > > > > > level, I am
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > proposing that they should have the
> > ability to
> > > >> > > turn it
> > > >> > > > > off
> > > >> > > > > > > > as well
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > at
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a cluster level. Since this is a topic
> > level
> > > >> > > feature,
> > > >> > > > > folks
> > > >> > > > > > > > may not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > spin up a separate cluster to try this
> > > >> feature,
> > > >> > > hence,
> > > >> > > > > we
> > > >> > > > > > > > need to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ensure that we provide them with the
> > ability
> > > >> to try
> > > >> > > > > tiered
> > > >> > > > > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a topic which could be deleted and
> > featured
> > > >> > > > > turned-off, so
> > > >> > > > > > > > that
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > rest
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the production cases are not impacted.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. Agree on not making public interface
> > > >> change as a
> > > >> > > > > > > > requirement
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > but we
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should define what "early access" means in
> > > >> that
> > > >> > > case.
> > > >> > > > > Users
> > > >> > > > > > > > may
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > not be
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aware that "early access" public APIs may
> > > >> change
> > > >> > > > > (unless I am
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > missing
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some documentation somewhere completely,
> > in
> > > >> which
> > > >> > > case
> > > >> > > > > I
> > > >> > > > > > > > apologize
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bringing this naive point).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divij Vaidya
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 2:27 PM Ismael
> > Juma <
> > > >> > > > > > > > m...@ismaeljuma.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Divij,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some of these are launch checklist items
> > > >> (not
> > > >> > > really
> > > >> > > > > > > > goals) and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > some
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compatibility guarantees. More below.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 12:10 PM Divij
> > Vaidya
> > > >> <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > divijvaidy...@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Satish
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could we consider adding "launch
> > goals"
> > > >> in the
> > > >> > > > > release
> > > >> > > > > > > > plan.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > While
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some of these may be implicit, it
> > would be
> > > >> > > nice to
> > > >> > > > > list
> > > >> > > > > > > > them
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > down in
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the release plan. For this release,
> > our
> > > >> launch
> > > >> > > > > > > > requirements
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > would be:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Users should be able to upgrade
> > from
> > > >> any
> > > >> > > prior
> > > >> > > > > Kafka
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > version to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > this
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > version.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is part of the compatibility
> > > >> guarantees. The
> > > >> > > > > upgrade
> > > >> > > > > > > > notes
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > mention
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this already. If there is a change in a
> > > >> given
> > > >> > > > > release, it
> > > >> > > > > > > > should
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > definitely
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be highlighted.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. On release, this version (or it's
> > > >> > > dependencies)
> > > >> > > > > would
> > > >> > > > > > > > not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > have any
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > known MEDIUM/HIGH CVE.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a new policy and the details
> > should
> > > >> be
> > > >> > > > > discussed.
> > > >> > > > > > > > In
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > particular,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the threshold (medium or high).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Presence of any "early access"/"beta"
> > > >> feature
> > > >> > > > > should not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > impact
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other production features when it is
> > not
> > > >> > > enabled.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a general guideline for early
> > access
> > > >> > > > > features and
> > > >> > > > > > > > not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > specific
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this release. It would be good to have a
> > > >> page
> > > >> > > that
> > > >> > > > > talks
> > > >> > > > > > > > about
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > these
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Once enabled, users should have an
> > > >> option to
> > > >> > > > > disable any
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > "early
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > access"/"beta" feature and resume
> > normal
> > > >> > > production
> > > >> > > > > > > > features,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > i.e.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > impact of beta features should be
> > > >> reversible.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This needs discussion and I don't think
> > it's
> > > >> > > > > reasonable as
> > > >> > > > > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > general
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rule.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For example, Kraft early access wasn't
> > > >> reversible
> > > >> > > > > and it
> > > >> > > > > > > > was not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > feasible
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for it to be.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. KIP-405 will be available in "early
> > > >> > > access"/"beta"
> > > >> > > > > > > > mode. Early
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > access/beta means that the public
> > facing
> > > >> > > > > interfaces won't
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > change in
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > future but the implementation is not
> > > >> > > recommended
> > > >> > > > > to be
> > > >> > > > > > > > used in
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > production.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think it's ok to make this a
> > > >> requirement.
> > > >> > > > > Early
> > > >> > > > > > > > access
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > is a way
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > get early feedback and all types of
> > changes
> > > >> > > should
> > > >> > > > > be on
> > > >> > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > table.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > They
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would be discussed via KIPs as usual. I
> > > >> believe
> > > >> > > > > there were
> > > >> > > > > > > > some
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > incompatible changes for Kraft during
> > the
> > > >> early
> > > >> > > > > access
> > > >> > > > > > > > period
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > although
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > team aimed to minimize work required
> > during
> > > >> > > > > upgrades. I
> > > >> > > > > > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > mentioned
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kraft a couple of times since it's a
> > good
> > > >> > > example of
> > > >> > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > large
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > feature
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > went through this process.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ismael
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Divij Vaidya
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> >

Reply via email to