Hi Yash, Thanks for raising the possibility of a more aggressive removal schedule for the tasks.max.enforce property now that it seems a 3.8.x branch is likely--I was wondering if someone would bring that up!
I think I'd prefer to err on the side of caution and give users more time to adjust, since some may skip 3.8.x and upgrade to 4.0.x, 4.1.x, etc. directly instead. It seems like the maintenance cost will be fairly low, and with the option to programmatically require it to be set to true in order to work with other features we may want to develop in the future, it shouldn't block any progress in the meantime. Thoughts? I'd also be curious what Greg Harris thinks about this, given that it seems relevant to KIP-987 [1]. [1] - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-987%3A+Connect+Static+Assignments Cheers, Chris On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 4:45 AM Federico Valeri <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks! This will finally reconcile Javadoc and implementation. > > +1 (non binding) > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 6:49 AM Yash Mayya <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > +1 (binding), thanks for the KIP. > > > > Based on discussion in other threads, it looks like the community is > > aligned with having a 3.8 release before the 4.0 release so we should be > > able to remove the 'tasks.max.enforce' connector property in 4.0 (we'd > > discussed potentially having to live with this property until 5.0 in this > > KIP's discussion thread). Once we have confirmation of a 3.8 release, > will > > this KIP be updated to reflect the exact AK versions where the deprecated > > property will be introduced and removed? > > > > Thanks, > > Yash > > > > On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 11:37 PM Greg Harris <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hey Chris, > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! I think the aggressive default and deprecation > > > schedule is the right choice for this change. > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:01 AM Mickael Maison < > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > > > +1 (binding), thanks for the KIP > > > > > > > > Mickael > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 8:55 PM Hector Geraldino (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD > A) > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Chris! > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] At: 01/02/24 11:49:18 UTC-5:00To: > > > [email protected] > > > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-1004: Enforce tasks.max property in Kafka > > > Connect > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > Happy New Year! Wanted to give this a bump now that the holidays > are > > > over > > > > > for a lot of us. Looking forward to people's thoughts! > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 10:36 AM Chris Egerton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to call for a vote on KIP-1004, which adds enforcement > for > > > the > > > > > > tasks.max connector property in Kafka Connect. > > > > > > > > > > > > The KIP: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1004%3A+Enforce+tasks.max+ > > > > > property+in+Kafka+Connect > > > > > > > > > > > > The discussion thread: > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/scx75cjwm19jyt19wxky41q9smf5nx6d > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
