+1 On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding) from me. Just one nit: can we change > `Headers.header(key)` to be `Headers.lastHeader(key)`? It's not a > deal-breaker, but I think it's better to let the name reflect the actual > behavior as clearly as possible. > > -Jason > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:10 AM, Jeroen van Disseldorp <jer...@axual.io> > wrote: > > > +1 on introducing the concept of headers, neutral on specific > > implementation. > > > > > > > > On 14/02/2017 22:34, Jay Kreps wrote: > > > >> Couple of things I think we still need to work out: > >> > >> 1. I think we agree about the key, but I think we haven't talked > about > >> the value yet. I think if our goal is an open ecosystem of these > >> header > >> spread across many plugins from many systems we should consider > >> making this > >> a string as well so it can be printed, set via a UI, set in config, > >> etc. > >> Basically encouraging pluggable serialization formats here will lead > >> to a > >> bit of a tower of babel. > >> 2. This proposal still includes a pretty big change to our > >> serialization > >> and protocol definition layer. Essentially it is introducing an > >> optional > >> type, where the format is data dependent. I think this is actually a > >> big > >> change though it doesn't seem like it. It means you can no longer > >> specify > >> this type with our type definition DSL, and likewise it requires > >> custom > >> handling in client libs. This isn't a huge thing, since the Record > >> definition is custom anyway, but I think this kind of protocol > >> inconsistency is very non-desirable and ties you to hand-coding > >> things. I > >> think the type should instead by [Key Value] in our BNF, where key > and > >> value are both short strings as used elsewhere. This brings it in > >> line with > >> the rest of the protocol. > >> 3. Could we get more specific about the exact Java API change to > >> ProducerRecord, ConsumerRecord, Record, etc? > >> > >> -Jay > >> > >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Michael Pearce <michael.pea...@ig.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >>> > >>> We would like to start the voting process for KIP-82 – Add record > >>> headers. > >>> The KIP can be found > >>> at > >>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > >>> 82+-+Add+Record+Headers > >>> > >>> Discussion thread(s) can be found here: > >>> > >>> http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1nSTOHTvj81?subj= > >>> Re+DISCUSS+KIP+82+Add+Record+Headers > >>> http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1Arxt22Tvj81?subj= > >>> Re+DISCUSS+KIP+82+Add+Record+Headers > >>> http://search-hadoop.com/?project=Kafka&q=KIP-82 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Mike > >>> > >>> The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and > for > >>> the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are > not > >>> the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to > >>> others > >>> this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by > replying > >>> to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the > >>> email > >>> and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate to > >>> the > >>> official business of this company shall be understood as neither given > >>> nor > >>> endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company > >>> registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG Index > >>> Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number > >>> 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate Hill, > >>> London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and > IG > >>> Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated by > >>> the > >>> Financial Conduct Authority. > >>> > >>> > > >
