+1 (binding) Thanks Xavier for the proposal ! I think the source compatibility should be very rare as of now.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Eno Thereska <eno.there...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > > On 12 Dec 2016, at 15:35, Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Damian Guy <damian....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 at 08:07 Ewen Cheslack-Postava <e...@confluent.io> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> +1 (binding) > >>> > >>> My only concern was around compatibility. It seems like the one case it > >> is > >>> incompatible would be, at worst, an extremely unusual edge case (and I > >>> *think* can be restricted further to "not source compatible for anyone > >>> extending the affected classes / interfaces and override affected > >>> methods"). > >>> > >>> -Ewen > >>> > >>> On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Xavier Léauté <xav...@confluent.io> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi everyone, > >>>> > >>>> I would like to start the vote for KIP-100 unless there are any more > >>>> comments. > >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > >>>> 100+-+Relax+Type+constraints+in+Kafka+Streams+API > >>>> > >>>> corresponding PR here https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/2205 > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Xavier > >>>> > >>> > >> > > -- -- Guozhang
