Sure, now we have 5 binding +1 votes and 2 non-biding +1 votes. Since we have more than three binding votes and no -1 votes, I guess KIP-324 is accepted? If so, I will then update the PR and the wiki.
P.S. Guozhang, is this still needs to be worked on? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-6788?filter=-1, if so, I can pick this up as my next story. Thanks, Yishun On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, please feel free to conclude this thread with a tally. > > > Guozhang > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 11:53 AM Yishun Guan <gyis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > Since it has been 72 hrs. Should we go ahead and accept this KIP? Thanks. > > > > Best > > Yishun > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018, 4:14 PM Yishun Guan <gyis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I see! Thanks. -Yishun > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018, 4:10 PM Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Yishun, > > >> > > >> We need to wait at least 72 business hours with three binding votes, > > >> although you already have enough votes (me, Matthias, Damian) we still > > >> need > > >> to wait enough hours for people to take a look and see if they have > any > > >> different opinions. > > >> > > >> After 72 hours have passed since you started the vote thread, we can > > close > > >> it as accepted. > > >> > > >> Guozhang > > >> > > >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:37 PM, Yishun Guan <gyis...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >> > Added! Thank you Colin. Do we now have enough votes? I read the > bylaws > > >> and > > >> > still a little bit confused. Thanks. - Yishun > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:24 PM, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > P.S. +1 (non-binding) once you add the info about it being > > >> thread-safe. > > >> > > > > >> > > best, > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018, at 15:23, Colin McCabe wrote: > > >> > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018, at 13:24, Yishun Guan wrote: > > >> > > > > Hi Colin, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > I agree with what Guozhang's opinion that because all the > other > > >> > clients > > >> > > > > have it (producer, consumer..) and this will gain more > > visibility > > >> for > > >> > > those > > >> > > > > application that use admin client. (Now I added this sentence > to > > >> the > > >> > > KIP) > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I agree. Thanks. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Since this returns an unmodifiableMap(like all the other > > client's > > >> > > metrics() > > >> > > > > return), I assume this will be thread-safe, what do you think? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Please document that it is thread-safe. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > thanks, > > >> > > > Colin > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, > > >> > > > > Yishun > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Colin McCabe < > > >> cmcc...@apache.org> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Can you add a little more explanation to the KIP for why you > > are > > >> > > adding > > >> > > > > > this method? Is it something streams needs, for example? > > Will > > >> it > > >> > > help > > >> > > > > > other applications that use admin client and want to expose > > >> > metrics? > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > What are the thread-safety guarantees for the map which is > > >> > returned? > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > best, > > >> > > > > > Colin > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018, at 11:29, Yishun Guan wrote: > > >> > > > > > > Hi All, > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I am starting a vote on this KIP: > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/lQg0BQ > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, > > >> > > > > > > Yishun > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> -- Guozhang > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > -- Guozhang >
