> I think we > should consider putting a character limit on the field to prevent > descriptions that are too long.
Good suggestion. A long description string is unnecessary and could be used as malicious code. What do you think of limiting the length to 64? I think it's long enough. Thanks, Yunze On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 12:52 PM Michael Marshall <mmarsh...@apache.org> wrote: > > Great discussion. Derivative clients are an important consideration > for our discussion around capturing the version information. > > Is there any way we can avoid giving regular users easy access to this > field via the ClientBuilder while still letting libraries add their > own suffix? We cannot prevent a custom library from serializing > whatever they would like in the field, but making this field easily > available to application code could be confusing and might decrease > the value of the version information. In my mind, the goal of the > version string is to give a weak signal that helps operators debug > client related issues. > > If we do leave this field exposed to the application code, I think we > should consider putting a character limit on the field to prevent > descriptions that are too long. > > Thanks, > Michael > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 8:28 PM Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> wrote: > > > > I've updated this proposal to retain the original client version > > string. I'd rather use the "description" term, which indicates the > > client version has extra description in addition to the client version > > string. > > > > Thanks, > > Yunze > > > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 10:11 AM Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Zike, > > > > > > Good suggestion. I agree with this approach. Maybe we can name it as > > > `subVersionString` to indicate that? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Yunze > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 3:14 PM Zike Yang <z...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Yunze, > > > > > > > > > I have changed this proposal to just add a config to `ClientBuilder`. > > > > > > > > I propose to add a field named `clientVersionSuffix` rather than the > > > > `clientVersion`. As I said before: > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/g0128l85fkcmw4821188mjjznxbo4lhd > > > > > > > > This is helpful for debugging. Especially for the case of the Nodejs > > > > client in which users can compile the C++ client on their own. This > > > > way, we can know exactly which underlying C++ client version the user > > > > uses. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Zike Yang > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 5:17 PM Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I have changed this proposal to just add a config to `ClientBuilder`. > > > > > And here is the demo implementation: > > > > > https://github.com/BewareMyPower/pulsar/pull/21/files > > > > > > > > > > PTAL again. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Yunze > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 10:39 PM Yunze Xu <y...@streamnative.io> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Enrico, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your suggestion. It makes sense to me. I will think again > > > > > > and modify this proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Tison, > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentioned the C++ client because the initial motivation is to > > > > > > solve > > > > > > the issue for the Python client and Node.js client. But after > > > > > > thinking > > > > > > for a while, I believe it's more general for clients of other > > > > > > languages, including Java. And this proposal is only for the Java > > > > > > client. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Yunze > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 1:42 PM tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with Enrico that it's better to have a config option. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, we cannot simply replace the PulsarVersion call with the > > > > > > > DynamicPulsarVersion call because the client version string is now > > > > > > > constructed as: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > String.format("Pulsar-Java-v%s", PulsarVersion.getVersion()) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a config of client version string, not pulsar version. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover, in your proposal, you mention the case of client c++ at > > > > > > > first, > > > > > > > but don't talk about it later. Is the scope of this proposal in > > > > > > > the Java > > > > > > > client only? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > tison. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> 于2023年3月4日周六 06:38写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yunze, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Il Ven 3 Mar 2023, 12:31 Yunze Xu > > > > > > > > <y...@streamnative.io.invalid> ha > > > > > > > > scritto: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Based on the previous discussion [1], I created a proposal to > > > > > > > > > support > > > > > > > > > configuring client version at SDK level: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/19705 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've added more explanations in the motivation part, let's > > > > > > > > > use this > > > > > > > > > PIP as a subsequent discussion of [1]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, there is a PR [2] in the pulsar-client-cpp repo because > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > motivation is more meaningful for the C++ client. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand well this problem, we have it for the cited > > > > > > > > clients but I also > > > > > > > > see the same issue for other libraries based on the Java > > > > > > > > client, like the > > > > > > > > official Apache Pulsar Reactive client. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I also see this problem in Startlight for JMS that is a JMS > > > > > > > > client for > > > > > > > > Pulsar that is based on the Java client. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While I agree on the problem and on the solution I think that a > > > > > > > > static > > > > > > > > field is not enough, we have some problems: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) there may be multiple usages of the Java client in the same > > > > > > > > JVM, and you > > > > > > > > want each client to report correctly its version > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) we would need to use the Java security Manager in order to > > > > > > > > prevent > > > > > > > > malicious code to modify the version or some other mechanism to > > > > > > > > prevent > > > > > > > > overriding the version. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe that in the case of the Java client is is easier to > > > > > > > > add a > > > > > > > > configuration entry to the Pulsar Client Configuration. That > > > > > > > > would become a > > > > > > > > field in the JavaClient. So each instance can declare its > > > > > > > > version and also > > > > > > > > malicious code won't be able ti easily tweak the version > > > > > > > > (because it won't > > > > > > > > be a simple static method call) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/n59k537fhthjnzkfxtc2p4zk4l0cv3mp > > > > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/pull/208 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
