Hi, I’m happy to go with Chia-Ping’s position here. I’m just aware that this option is already entirely broken. Either way, it’s a very small point and it can certainly remain until its final removal in AK 5.0.
Thanks, Andrew > On 5 Aug 2024, at 14:29, TengYao Chi <kiting...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Andrew, Chia-Ping > > Thanks for the suggestions. > Personally, I also want to remove this in 4.0 since it is not a significant > function. > But as Chia-Ping mentioned, we seem to have a ‘1-year rule’ (or convention) > for removing code, so I intend to follow the convention rather than being > too aggressive. > On the other hand, since this function doesn’t have much impact, maybe > there’s a chance to ask Colin about his thoughts. > What do you think? > > Best Regards, > TengYao > > Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@gmail.com> 於 2024年8月5日 週一 下午7:24寫道： > >>> So, I am in favour of the KIP, but I suggest that it should actually be >> removed in 4.0 >>> rather than deprecated in 4.0 and then removed in 5.0 because it already >> doesn’t work. >> >> noted that removing it will introduce some broken behavior. For >> example, the users who are using the config unintentionally will get >> error "delete-config is not a recognized option" >> >> I'd like to delete it in 4.0, but we need to follow the depreciation >> rules - remove it in major release and wait for 1-year >> >> There are some KIPs which don't wait for one year (see previous >> discussion: >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bwqrsk341h0op662t1qhz781ld41lo5b), >> but we agree they are exceptions. >> >> If this KIP-1079 can be considered to be another exception, it must be >> included by 3.9.0. However, we should not merge KIP-1079 into 3.9 >> unless Colin agrees. >> >> In short, the config is not critical and we try to follow a "complete" >> deprecation cycle. Hence, it should be deprecated in 4.0 and be >> removed in 5.0 >> >> Best, >> Chia-Ping
