dajac commented on code in PR #14670: URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14670#discussion_r1386239113
########## clients/src/test/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumerTest.java: ########## @@ -222,42 +214,74 @@ public void cleanup() { } } - @Test - public void testMetricsReporterAutoGeneratedClientId() { + private static Collection<Arguments> bothGroupProtocols() { + return Arrays.stream(GroupProtocol.values()).map(Arguments::of).collect(Collectors.toList()); + } + + /** + * A given test may choose to use the {@link GroupProtocol#GENERIC generic group protocol} for a number of reasons. + * Among the reasons for a test to do so is because it... + * + * <ul> + * <li> + * ...exercises rebalancing logic that is not yet implemented in the + * {@link GroupProtocol#CONSUMER consumer group protocol}. + * </li> + * <li>...includes topic metadata that is not yet implemented in the consumer group protocol.</li> + * <li>...fails, possibly due to the omission of functionality in the consumer group protocol.</li> + * <li>...uses logic, timing, etc. that are not applicable to the consumer group protocol.</li> + * </ul> + * + * Less than half of the tests for the consumer group protocol pass as of now, but it's very tedious to + * investigate at this point due to known bugs and missing functionality. + */ Review Comment: Yeah, I would also use `EnumSource` for those ones and I would remove this comment. We should rather track the missing parts with Jiras. -- 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