Hi Justine, Since these configurations are (and have always been) internal, changing or removing them should be no problem.
best, Colin On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, at 16:51, Justine Olshan wrote: > Hey Colin, > > I made a single configuration as part of KIP-1022 called > unstableFeatureVersionsEnabled. Would we want to deprecate that and use the > more generic name? Unfortunately, the config as defined in KIP-1022 is > already in 3.8. > > Thanks for taking a look at this again. This will help with a lot of > confusion around the topic of unstable versions. > > Justine > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 3:39 PM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> We previously discussed this KIP for documenting how we deal with unstable >> MetadataVersions. At that time, we didn't bring it to a vote. >> >> Proven handed this off to me, and I've made some changes to the proposal >> since then: >> >> - I expanded the scope to also cover "RPCs with latestVersionUnstable" >> >> - I expanded the scope to cover other unstable KIP-584 features >> (MetadataVersion is just one KIP-584 feature, after all) >> >> - Made a single configuration cover all of the above. Since it's silly to >> enable an unstable MV, but have it fail because you have not also set some >> other configurations to get unstable things. >> >> - Clarified that unstable features will be usable only from JUnit, nowhere >> else >> >> - Added a "rejected alternatives" section >> >> - Clarified that there is no need to "reserve" previously used but no >> longer extant unstable features, MVs, or RPCs. >> >> Please take a look. >> >> best, >> Colin >>
