Thanks Jun and Becket! I think your point about 1.0 vs 2.0 makes sense I can update the KIP to reflect this.
What's the process for 2.0 contributions as I can see that trunk is 1.1 and no 2.x branch? Here's what I can do: - Not write the code change until trunk moves to 2.0. - Write the change but leave the PR open until we start working on 2.0. - Stall this KIP until 2.0 development starts (IIRC it's pretty soon). - Do it in a backward compatible way (publish both sets of metrics) and open a Jira tagged on 2.0 to remove the old metrics. Let me know what's the right way to go. Thanks! On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Becket Qin <becket....@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the KIP, Charly. > > +1. The proposal looks good to me. I agree with Jun that it is better to > make the metrics consistent with other metrics. That being said, arguably > this is a backwards incompatible change. Since we are at 1.0, backwards > incompatible changes are supposed to be in 2.0. Not sure if that is the > plan or not. > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > Hi, Jiangjie, > > > > Since you proposed the original KIP-92, do you want to see if this KIP > > makes sense? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jun > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:48 AM, charly molter <charly.mol...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I would like to start the voting thread for KIP-225. > > > This KIP proposes to correct some lag metrics emitted by the consumer. > > > > > > The KIP wiki is here: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/uaBzB > > > > > > The discussion thread is here: > > > http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1F33uL19AYx/threaded > > > > > > Also could someone assign me to this Jira: KAFKA-5890 > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5890> > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -- > > > Charly Molter > > > > > > -- Charly Molter
