RE: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations
Hi all, As @Mario Fiore Vitale<mailto:mvit...@redhat.com> mentioned, we have now received enough votes. Therefore, should we close this voting and start the development? On 2024/06/14 08:00:45 Mario Fiore Vitale wrote: > Hi All, > > We have 4 binding +1 votes. Do you think the vote can be closed and > mark the KIP as approved? > > Thanks, > Mario. > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 8:44 AM Punsak Incham > mailto:pu...@mfec.co.th>> wrote: > > > Thanks! Chris. > > Waiting @Mario Fiore Vitale to close the voting and mark it as approved. > > > > Cheers. > > > > On 2024/06/14 06:10:15 Chris Egerton wrote: > > > We don't have to patch every SMT in the same release, we can > > > definitely move incrementally. We'll just have to note in the > > > release notes and the KIPs page ( > > > https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F > > > cwik%2F=05%7C02%7Cpunsak%40mfec.co.th%7Cf933b95ace7c4eca8a7c0 > > > 8dc8ec20be4%7C74105ed972ff4685915475f7408b6f67%7C1%7C0%7C638542211 > > > 281036334%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2lu > > > MzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C=u8Gak9%2F7IZ > > > b7vxi2aAW26jup4IcLiyHXWPikv6gpSDo%3D=0 > > > i.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FKAFKA%2FKafka%2BImprovement% > > > 2BPr > > > oposals=05%7C02%7Cpunsak%40mfec.co.th%7Ca24883ed513b45d31ca50 > > > 8dc8 > > > c3c2de1%7C74105ed972ff4685915475f7408b6f67%7C1%7C0%7C6385394373000 > > > 4293 > > > 1%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB > > > TiI6 > > > Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C=mcPQROjQyuK1Z2vDl%2BLVki > > > 8AeB > > > FsnTIkqxaX8FR2LRA%3D=0) when the change for the KIP was > > > applied to each SMT. > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:03 PM Punsak Incham > > > mailto:pu...@mfec.co.th.invalid>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks! Chris. > > > > > > > > One question : We will need to wait to fix all SMTs in the KIP > > > > and release it to user, or we can split some fixed SMTs to user early? > > > > (I noticed that the PR of Mario ready to merge and it effect > > > > only ExtractField and > > > > InsertField) > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024/06/13 17:01:49 Chris Egerton wrote: > > > > > Hi Punsak, > > > > > > > > > > If nobody has signaled their intent to contribute that work > > > > > yet (which I believe is the case), you are welcome to take it > > > > > on > > yourself! > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, 12:52 Punsak Incham > > > > > mailto:pu...@mfec.co.th.invalid>> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > My customers are using these SMTs, I think it can affect to > > > > > > their > > > > project > > > > > > (about data correctness) in the future. > > > > > > > > > > > > (You may think why I'm not developing it and send to my > > > > > > customers directly? Because they will use only SMTs that > > > > > > published by Kafka.) > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024/06/13 16:38:45 Punsak Incham wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > I noticed that the PR of Mario effected only InsertField > > > > > > > and > > > > > > ExtractField, so I'd like to amend others SMTs in that KIP > > > > > > because I > > > > have > > > > > > experienced to develop custom SMTs. > > > > > > > Can I join to contribute (open PR)? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024/06/13 15:59:36 Greg Harris wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey Mario, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for updating the KIP. > > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:32 AM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > > > mv...@redhat.com<mailto:mv...@redhat.com>>
RE: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations
Thanks! Chris. Waiting @Mario Fiore Vitale to close the voting and mark it as approved. Cheers. On 2024/06/14 06:10:15 Chris Egerton wrote: > We don't have to patch every SMT in the same release, we can > definitely move incrementally. We'll just have to note in the release > notes and the KIPs page ( > https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwik > i.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FKAFKA%2FKafka%2BImprovement%2BPr > oposals=05%7C02%7Cpunsak%40mfec.co.th%7Ca24883ed513b45d31ca508dc8 > c3c2de1%7C74105ed972ff4685915475f7408b6f67%7C1%7C0%7C63853943730004293 > 1%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6 > Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C=mcPQROjQyuK1Z2vDl%2BLVki8AeB > FsnTIkqxaX8FR2LRA%3D=0) when the change for the KIP was > applied to each SMT. > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:03 PM Punsak Incham > > wrote: > > > Thanks! Chris. > > > > One question : We will need to wait to fix all SMTs in the KIP and > > release it to user, or we can split some fixed SMTs to user early? > > (I noticed that the PR of Mario ready to merge and it effect only > > ExtractField and > > InsertField) > > > > > > On 2024/06/13 17:01:49 Chris Egerton wrote: > > > Hi Punsak, > > > > > > If nobody has signaled their intent to contribute that work yet > > > (which I believe is the case), you are welcome to take it on yourself! > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, 12:52 Punsak Incham > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > My customers are using these SMTs, I think it can affect to > > > > their > > project > > > > (about data correctness) in the future. > > > > > > > > (You may think why I'm not developing it and send to my > > > > customers directly? Because they will use only SMTs that > > > > published by Kafka.) > > > > > > > > On 2024/06/13 16:38:45 Punsak Incham wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > I noticed that the PR of Mario effected only InsertField and > > > > ExtractField, so I'd like to amend others SMTs in that KIP > > > > because I > > have > > > > experienced to develop custom SMTs. > > > > > Can I join to contribute (open PR)? > > > > > > > > > > On 2024/06/13 15:59:36 Greg Harris wrote: > > > > > > Hey Mario, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for updating the KIP. > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:32 AM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > mv...@redhat.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, the KIP still omits the MaskField and > > > > > > > > ValueToKey > > > > > > > transformations. > > > > > > > This looks like just a typo to me, should we update the > > > > > > > KIP > > before > > > > closing > > > > > > > the vote? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good catch. I have just updated the KIP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that we can close the voting and mark it as > > > > > > > approved, > > right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 7:21 PM Greg Harris > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for mentioning the earlier DISCUSS thread. I > > > > > > > > found > > this > > > > comment > > > > > > > > from Chris, which was agreed upon and applied to the KIP: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I think we should just do one KIP for all the > > > > > > > > > SMTs. You > > > > don't have > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > implement everything all at once or by yourself, but I > > > > >
RE: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations
Thanks! Chris. One question : We will need to wait to fix all SMTs in the KIP and release it to user, or we can split some fixed SMTs to user early? (I noticed that the PR of Mario ready to merge and it effect only ExtractField and InsertField) On 2024/06/13 17:01:49 Chris Egerton wrote: > Hi Punsak, > > If nobody has signaled their intent to contribute that work yet (which I > believe is the case), you are welcome to take it on yourself! > > Cheers, > > Cheers > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, 12:52 Punsak Incham wrote: > > > My customers are using these SMTs, I think it can affect to their project > > (about data correctness) in the future. > > > > (You may think why I'm not developing it and send to my customers > > directly? Because they will use only SMTs that published by Kafka.) > > > > On 2024/06/13 16:38:45 Punsak Incham wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > I noticed that the PR of Mario effected only InsertField and > > ExtractField, so I'd like to amend others SMTs in that KIP because I have > > experienced to develop custom SMTs. > > > Can I join to contribute (open PR)? > > > > > > On 2024/06/13 15:59:36 Greg Harris wrote: > > > > Hey Mario, > > > > > > > > Thanks for updating the KIP. > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:32 AM Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > > > However, the KIP still omits the MaskField and ValueToKey > > > > > transformations. > > > > > This looks like just a typo to me, should we update the KIP before > > closing > > > > > the vote? > > > > > > > > > > Good catch. I have just updated the KIP. > > > > > > > > > > I think that we can close the voting and mark it as approved, right? > > > > > > > > > > Thank you all. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 7:21 PM Greg Harris > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for mentioning the earlier DISCUSS thread. I found this > > comment > > > > > > from Chris, which was agreed upon and applied to the KIP: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I think we should just do one KIP for all the SMTs. You > > don't have > > > > > > to > > > > > > > implement everything all at once or by yourself, but I don't see > > why we > > > > > > > should require one or more follow-up KIPs to apply the exact same > > > > > changes > > > > > > > to the SMTs we missed the first time. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, the KIP still omits the MaskField and ValueToKey > > > > > transformations. > > > > > > This looks like just a typo to me, should we update the KIP before > > > > > closing > > > > > > the vote? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 6:50 AM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > mv...@redhat.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same check was made by Chris Egerton during the discussion > > thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The original KIP scope was just for the InsertField, > > ExtractField SMTs, > > > > > > > then we decided to enlarge the scope of only the KIP to also > > other > > > > > > > potential affected SMTs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As of now the PR scope, instead, is only for InsertField and > > > > > ExtractField > > > > > > > SMTs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Mario. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 12:08 AM Greg Harris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > >
RE: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations
My customers are using these SMTs, I think it can affect to their project (about data correctness) in the future. (You may think why I'm not developing it and send to my customers directly? Because they will use only SMTs that published by Kafka.) On 2024/06/13 16:38:45 Punsak Incham wrote: > Hi all, > I noticed that the PR of Mario effected only InsertField and ExtractField, so > I'd like to amend others SMTs in that KIP because I have experienced to > develop custom SMTs. > Can I join to contribute (open PR)? > > On 2024/06/13 15:59:36 Greg Harris wrote: > > Hey Mario, > > > > Thanks for updating the KIP. > > +1 (binding) > > > > Greg > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:32 AM Mario Fiore Vitale > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > However, the KIP still omits the MaskField and ValueToKey > > > transformations. > > > This looks like just a typo to me, should we update the KIP before closing > > > the vote? > > > > > > Good catch. I have just updated the KIP. > > > > > > I think that we can close the voting and mark it as approved, right? > > > > > > Thank you all. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 7:21 PM Greg Harris > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > > > > > > Thank you for mentioning the earlier DISCUSS thread. I found this > > > > comment > > > > from Chris, which was agreed upon and applied to the KIP: > > > > > > > > > Yes, I think we should just do one KIP for all the SMTs. You don't > > > > > have > > > > to > > > > > implement everything all at once or by yourself, but I don't see why > > > > > we > > > > > should require one or more follow-up KIPs to apply the exact same > > > changes > > > > > to the SMTs we missed the first time. > > > > > > > > However, the KIP still omits the MaskField and ValueToKey > > > transformations. > > > > This looks like just a typo to me, should we update the KIP before > > > closing > > > > the vote? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 6:50 AM Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > > The same check was made by Chris Egerton during the discussion thread. > > > > > > > > > > The original KIP scope was just for the InsertField, ExtractField > > > > > SMTs, > > > > > then we decided to enlarge the scope of only the KIP to also other > > > > > potential affected SMTs. > > > > > > > > > > As of now the PR scope, instead, is only for InsertField and > > > ExtractField > > > > > SMTs. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Mario. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 12:08 AM Greg Harris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP. I'm on-board with this KIP, I just wanted to > > > > verify a > > > > > > discrepancy I noticed. > > > > > > > > > > > > I checked all of the call-sites of Struct#get(Field) and > > > > > Struct#get(String) > > > > > > in Kafka, and noticed there are some call-sites which are not > > > included > > > > in > > > > > > the KIP. > > > > > > 1. The Flatten transformation seems to already have the > > > > > > "replace.null.with.default=false" behavior unconditionally. > > > > > > 2. The MaskField transformation unconditionally injects default > > > values > > > > > for > > > > > > top-level structs. > > > > > > 3. The ValueTokey transformation injects defaults for each of the > > > > > > configured "fields" > > > > > > 4. The Values#convertToString method injects default values, but as > > > > this > > > > > > isn't configurable I think we'll need to leave it as-is. > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you intend to add this configuration to the Flatten, MaskF
RE: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations
t; > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just wanted to bump up this thread for visibility. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:31 PM Mickael Maison < > > > > > mickael.mai...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mickael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 12:06 PM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > > > > > mvit...@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After 7 days I received only one vote. Should I suppose this > > > will > > > > > not > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > approved? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 4:14 PM Chris Egerton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 4:22 AM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > > > > > > mvit...@redhat.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to call a vote on KIP-1040 which aims to improve > > > > > > handling > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other > > > > > > > > transformations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KIP - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=303794677 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discussion thread - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/ggqqqjbg6ccpz8g6ztyj7oxr80q5184n > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > > > > > > > > Mario > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/> > > > > > > > > > <https://www.redhat.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/> > > > > > > > <https://www.redhat.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/> > > > > <https://www.redhat.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > Senior Software Engineer > > > > Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/> > > <https://www.redhat.com/> > > > Punsak Incham Data Platform Engineer (Kafka and Confluent) MFEC
RE: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations
Hi all, I have a few questions. If you include all the related SMTs in the KIP, such as MaskField and ValueToKey, As a user, when will I be able to use the updated SMTs? Do all the related SMTs in the KIP need to be fixed first before you release them for users like me to use? Punsak Incham Data Platform Engineer (Kafka and Confluent) MFEC -Original Message- From: Greg Harris Sent: 13 มิถุนายน 2567 0:14 To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations Hi Mario, Thank you for mentioning the earlier DISCUSS thread. I found this comment from Chris, which was agreed upon and applied to the KIP: > Yes, I think we should just do one KIP for all the SMTs. You don't > have to implement everything all at once or by yourself, but I don't > see why we should require one or more follow-up KIPs to apply the > exact same changes to the SMTs we missed the first time. However, the KIP still omits the MaskField and ValueToKey transformations. This looks like just a typo to me, should we update the KIP before closing the vote? Thanks, Greg On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 6:50 AM Mario Fiore Vitale wrote: > Hi Greg, > > The same check was made by Chris Egerton during the discussion thread. > > The original KIP scope was just for the InsertField, ExtractField > SMTs, then we decided to enlarge the scope of only the KIP to also > other potential affected SMTs. > > As of now the PR scope, instead, is only for InsertField and > ExtractField SMTs. > > Thanks, > Mario. > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 12:08 AM Greg Harris > > > wrote: > > > Hi Mario, > > > > Thanks for the KIP. I'm on-board with this KIP, I just wanted to > > verify a discrepancy I noticed. > > > > I checked all of the call-sites of Struct#get(Field) and > Struct#get(String) > > in Kafka, and noticed there are some call-sites which are not > > included in the KIP. > > 1. The Flatten transformation seems to already have the > > "replace.null.with.default=false" behavior unconditionally. > > 2. The MaskField transformation unconditionally injects default > > values > for > > top-level structs. > > 3. The ValueTokey transformation injects defaults for each of the > > configured "fields" > > 4. The Values#convertToString method injects default values, but as > > this isn't configurable I think we'll need to leave it as-is. > > > > Did you intend to add this configuration to the Flatten, MaskField, > > or ValueToKey transformations, or should those be addressed in a > > separate effort? > > Since the "false" behavior is desirable, I think the Flatten > > transform could be left as-is, rather than adding a configuration > > that nobody > needs. > > > > Thanks, > > Greg > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 9:24 AM Yash Mayya wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 7:40 PM Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Just wanted to bump up this thread for visibility. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:31 PM Mickael Maison < > > mickael.mai...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! > > > > > > > > > > Mickael > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 12:06 PM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > > mvit...@redhat.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > After 7 days I received only one vote. Should I suppose this > > > > > > will > > not > > > > be > > > > > > approved? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 4:14 PM Chris Egerton > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 4:22 AM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > > > mvit...@redhat.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > &
Subscribe for discussion on Kafka® development
I want to subscribe for discussion on Kafka® development. Best regards, [A black and blue logo Description automatically generated] Punsak Incham (Mon) Data Platform Engineer Data Modernization Tel : +66(0)91-790-1302 | Email : pun...@mfec.co.th<mailto:pun...@mfec.co.th> [signature_2789072556] DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or legally privileged information for use of MFEC Public Company Limited only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to copy or disclose all or any part of it without the prior written consent of the company. Refer to https://www.mfec.co.th/en/privacy-policy/
RE: Re: [VOTE] KIP-1040: Improve handling of nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other transformations
Thanks for the KIP! +1 (Non-binding) On 2024/06/11 16:23:38 Yash Mayya wrote: > Thanks for the KIP! > > +1 (binding) > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 7:40 PM Mario Fiore Vitale > mv...@redhat.com<mailto:mv...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Just wanted to bump up this thread for visibility. > > > > Thanks! > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:31 PM Mickael Maison > > mi...@gmail.com<mailto:mi...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Mario, > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > Thanks for the KIP! > > > > > > Mickael > > > > > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 12:06 PM Mario Fiore Vitale > > > mv...@redhat.com<mailto:mv...@redhat.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > After 7 days I received only one vote. Should I suppose this will not > > be > > > > approved? > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 4:14 PM Chris Egerton > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 4:22 AM Mario Fiore Vitale < > > mvit...@redhat.com<mailto:mvit...@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to call a vote on KIP-1040 which aims to improve handling > > of > > > > > > nullable values in InsertField, ExtractField, and other > > > transformations > > > > > > > > > > > > KIP - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=303794677 > > > > > > > > > > > > Discussion thread - > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/ggqqqjbg6ccpz8g6ztyj7oxr80q5184n > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > > > Mario > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > > > > > Senior Software Engineer > > > > > > > > Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/ > > > > https://www.redhat.com/ > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Mario Fiore Vitale > > > > Senior Software Engineer > > > > Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/ > > https://www.redhat.com/ > > > Punsak Incham Data Platform Engineer (Kafka and Confluent) MFEC
