Hi David,
Thanks for bringing this issue to this thread.
I marked https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15435 as a blocker.

Thanks,
Satish.

On Tue, 5 Sept 2023 at 21:29, David Arthur <mum...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Satish. Thanks for running the release!
>
> I'd like to raise this as a blocker for 3.6
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15435.
>
> It's a very quick fix, so I should be able to post a PR soon.
>
> Thanks!
> David
>
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 11:44 PM Justine Olshan <jols...@confluent.io.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Satish. This is done 👍
> >
> > Justine
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 5:16 PM Satish Duggana <satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Justine,
> > > I went through KAFKA-15424 and the PR[1]. It seems there are no
> > > dependent changes missing in 3.6 branch. They seem to be low risk as
> > > you mentioned. Please merge it to the 3.6 branch as well.
> > >
> > > 1. https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14324.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Satish.
> > >
> > > On Tue, 5 Sept 2023 at 05:06, Justine Olshan
> > > <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Sorry I meant to add the jira as well.
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15424
> > > >
> > > > Justine
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 4:34 PM Justine Olshan <jols...@confluent.io>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hey Satish,
> > > > >
> > > > > I was working on adding dynamic configuration for
> > > > > transaction verification. The PR is approved and ready to merge into
> > > trunk.
> > > > > I was thinking I could also add it to 3.6 since it is fairly low
> > risk.
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > Justine
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 6:21 PM Sophie Blee-Goldman <
> > > ableegold...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Thanks Satish! The fix has been merged and cherrypicked to 3.6
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 6:02 AM Satish Duggana <
> > > satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > 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
> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > > > >>
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> David Arthur

Reply via email to