gharris1727 commented on PR #14309: URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14309#issuecomment-1707372782
> I honestly find the EnrichablePlugin class pretty hard to read, and prefer the merge style when it can be used. Sure, I'll buy that. I'm fine with migrating away from EnrichablePlugin to something else as long as it is a common abstraction. My concern here was just that we were adding a distinct third style of validating configurations when there appeared to be a lot of common functionality that could be shared. > If the stylistic suggestions are not blockers for review, but blockers for merging, do you think we could establish the ideal user-facing behavior here and then use a separate PR for a refactoring? I can target this branch with that PR (which would allow review to take place on it without having to merge this one to trunk), or target trunk (if we feel comfortable merging this without blocking on a refactor). I'm fine with reviewing this as-is and merging to trunk, and then refactoring the other two strategies in a follow-up. I think using lambdas is more appropriate than anonymous classes which are constructed for just one method call and then discarded. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: jira-unsubscr...@kafka.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
