I'd LOVE to have KIP-33 get it.

Can you work with Jun to make sure the timing will work?

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Becket Qin <becket....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Gwen,
>
> KIP-47 is voted and passed, but not merged yet. It is actually depending on
> KIP-33 which is in the voting process.
>
> I know we discussed on the KIP hangout that we will do KIP-33 post 0.10.0.
> But since 0.10.0 is delayed, maybe we can include KIP-33 given it is a
> long-wanted fix by many users.
> And I agree with Grant that it would be nice to have KIP-35 in this
> release.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jiangjie (Becket) Qin
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> > I think we are in agreement here.
> > Note that KIP-47 is already voted and merged AFAIK, so it will be in
> 0.10.0
> > either way (actually, it will be nice if someone tries using this feature
> > on a the RC...)
> >
> > Gwen
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Grant Henke <ghe...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Below are my thoughts on the release features. I don't feel too
> strongly
> > > about it, but I figured I would lay out my current perspective on the
> > 0.10
> > > release.
> > >
> > > When considering the optimal time to do this major release the
> > > considerations I am weighing are:
> > >
> > >    - Compatibility
> > >       - Are more breaking changes almost ready? We want major releases
> to
> > >       be infrequent. Having the breaking changes/pieces in will help
> 0.10
> > > last
> > >       longer.
> > >       - Breaking again in 3 months is not favorable, especially for
> > >       clients.
> > >    - Features vs Risk
> > >       - Is it worth it for a user to upgrade? Given there is risk in a
> > >       major upgrade, are there enough features to take that risk on?
> > >       - The breaking change we have introduced is the timestamp changes
> > >       (KIP-31/KIP-32), but users can't use it yet (KIP-33) beyond a
> purge
> > >       improvement.
> > >       - We did add Streams but that could technically be added in a
> 0.9.1
> > >       release. (I think)
> > >
> > > For those reasons I would prefer to block on these changes for 0.10
> > >
> > >    - KIP-4's Metadata changes
> > >    - Breaking wire protocol change
> > >       - Also, fixes critical issues and adds rack fields from KIP-36
> > >       - Patch available, need consensus/vote on metadata protocol
> change
> > >    - KIP-35: Retrieving protocol version
> > >    - Though Kafka's internal usage has not been fully vetted, we all
> > agree
> > >       its useful to be able to ask for the protocol versions
> > >       - The Kafka client community really wants this
> > >       - It can reduce the impact/breakage of future releases
> > >    - KIP-33: Add a time based log index
> > >       - This was a major motivation for KIP-31/32 and adding it could
> > help
> > >       vet those changes to ensure we don't need a breaking change later
> > >       - Adding a feature flag to disable it broker side has been
> > discussed
> > >       to mitigate risk
> > >       - It doesn't need to block the release if we are confident it
> won't
> > >       need a breaking change
> > >
> > > It would also be nice to get these in if ready, but I don't think the
> > need
> > > to block the release:
> > >
> > >    - KIP-43: Kafka SASL enhancements
> > >       - Scope has been reduced
> > >       - Seams it could be added quickly
> > >       - Not breaking addition, so doesn't need to block
> > >    - KIP-47: Add timestamp-based log deletion policy
> > >    - Also leverages KIP-32/33 further vetting its implementation
> > >       - Not breaking addition, so doesn't need to block
> > >
> > > That said, I still think we should push to get a release candidate in a
> > > reasonable amount of time (a couple weeks?). Hopefully that is
> feasible.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Grant
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Rajini Sivaram <
> > > rajinisiva...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If there is time, we will be very keen on including KIP-43 in the
> > 0.10.0
> > > > release.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Rajini
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Ashish Singh <asi...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If it is possible, I am also in favor of having some time to
> include
> > a
> > > > few
> > > > > more KIPs in 0.10.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Jason Gustafson <
> > ja...@confluent.io>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think it would be nice to get a resolution on KIP-35 before the
> > > > > release.
> > > > > > We were reluctant to push it through when the timeline was tight
> > > > (because
> > > > > > of unclear implications), but if we have more time to consider
> it,
> > it
> > > > > > definitely would feel better not to have the issue hanging.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Jason
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Gwen Shapira <
> g...@confluent.io>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. Thank you, Guozhang. We'll roll out a new RC early next week
> > if
> > > > this
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > ok?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. I'm seeing very little community feedback (positive or
> > negative)
> > > > on
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > release vote.
> > > > > > > Would people feel better about the release if we delay it a bit
> > to
> > > > get
> > > > > > some
> > > > > > > high-priority and really awesome KIPs in? (KIP-35, KIP-43,
> > metadata
> > > > > > changes
> > > > > > > from KIP-4 for example)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gwen
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Guozhang Wang <
> > wangg...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Gwen:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We found a critical bug in Kafka Streams that heavily impact
> > its
> > > > > > > > performance:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/1163
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It has been merged to 0.10.0 branch. Can we roll out another
> > RC?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Guozhang
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Dana Powers <
> > > > dana.pow...@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +1 -- verified that all kafka-python integration tests now
> > pass
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Gwen Shapira <
> > > g...@confluent.io
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hello Kafka users, developers and client-developers,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This is the second candidate for release of Apache Kafka
> > > > > 0.10.0.0.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This is a major release that includes:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (1) New message format including timestamps
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (2) client interceptor API
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (3) Kafka Streams.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Since this is a major release, we will give people more
> > time
> > > to
> > > > > try
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > out and give feedback.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Release notes for the 0.10.0.0
> > > > > > > > > > release:
> > > > > > > >
> > http://home.apache.org/~gwenshap/0.10.0.0-rc1/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > *** Please download, test and vote by Monday, April 4,
> 4pm
> > PT
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kafka's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the
> > > > > > > > > > release:http://kafka.apache.org/KEYS
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * Release artifacts to be voted upon (source and
> > > > > > > > > > binary):http://home.apache.org/~gwenshap/0.10.0.0-rc1/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * Maven artifacts to be voted
> > > > > > > > > > upon:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * scala-dochttp://
> > > > > home.apache.org/~gwenshap/0.10.0.0-rc1/scaladoc
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * java-dochttp://
> > > > home.apache.org/~gwenshap/0.10.0.0-rc1/javadoc/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * tag to be voted upon (off 0.10.0 branch) is the
> 0.10.0.0
> > > > > > > > > > tag:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=kafka.git;a=tag;h=759940658d805b1262101dce0ea9a9d562c5f30d
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * Documentation:
> > > > http://kafka.apache.org/0100/documentation.html
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > * Protocol:http://kafka.apache.org/0100/protocol.html
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > /**************************************
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Gwen
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > -- Guozhang
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Ashish
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Rajini
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Grant Henke
> > > Software Engineer | Cloudera
> > > gr...@cloudera.com | twitter.com/gchenke | linkedin.com/in/granthenke
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to