Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-12 Thread Ismael Juma
The only public classes are the ones in the javadoc. SecurityProtocol was not public, but it now is. Ismael On 13 Oct 2017 12:16 am, "Ted Yu" wrote: > Thanks for the explanation. > > SecurityProtocol was declared public in previous releases, hence I didn't > notice that it is internal. > > On T

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-12 Thread Ted Yu
Thanks for the explanation. SecurityProtocol was declared public in previous releases, hence I didn't notice that it is internal. On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > For internal classes that are designed to be abstracted away from normal > users, I think it is OK to not men

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-12 Thread Guozhang Wang
For internal classes that are designed to be abstracted away from normal users, I think it is OK to not mention it in the upgrade guides. For developers rather than users of Kafka, they are assumed to be familiar with the codebase and not only rely on upgrade guide docs for such information. Guo

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-12 Thread Ted Yu
bq. Internal classes which had previously been located in this package have been moved elsewhere It would be clearer to Kafka users if the relocation of org.apache.kafka.common.protocol.SecurityProtocol is mentioned explicitly. Otherwise they need to dig into the code to find out. Just my two cen

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-12 Thread Guozhang Wang
Ted, I can found that we do have a corresponding doc change for this renaming: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/3863/files#diff-8100f2416b657c1e1e4238dabf8a15e0 And from the web docs: http://home.apache.org/~guozhang/kafka-1.0.0-rc0/kafka_2.11-1.0.0-site-docs.tgz I can indeed find it in th

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-12 Thread Guozhang Wang
Thanks Ted, I'm looking into this for possible doc changes now. Guozhang On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Ted Yu wrote: > Looks like the following change is needed for some downstream project to > compile their code (which was using 0.11.0.1): > > -import org.apache.kafka.common.protocol.Secur

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-12 Thread Ismael Juma
See inline. On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Vahid S Hashemian < vahidhashem...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > [2017-10-11 21:45:11,642] FATAL (kafka.Kafka$) > java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unknown signal: HUP > at sun.misc.Signal.(Unknown Source) > at kafka.Kafka$.registerHandler

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-11 Thread Vahid S Hashemian
"dev@kafka.apache.org" , "us...@kafka.apache.org" , kafka-clients Date: 10/10/2017 06:34 PM Subject:[VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0 Hello Kafka users, developers and client-developers, This is the first candidate for release of Apache Kafka 1.0.0. It's worth noting that s

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-11 Thread Ted Yu
Looks like the following change is needed for some downstream project to compile their code (which was using 0.11.0.1): -import org.apache.kafka.common.protocol.SecurityProtocol; +import org.apache.kafka.common.security.auth.SecurityProtocol; I took a look at docs/upgrade.html but didn't see any

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-11 Thread Guozhang Wang
Thanks for the check Ted. I just made the jars available at mvn staging now: https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/kafka/ Guozhang On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Ted Yu wrote: > Guozhang: > I took a brief look under the staging tree. > e.g. > https://repository.ap

Re: [VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-10 Thread Ted Yu
Guozhang: I took a brief look under the staging tree. e.g. https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/kafka/kafka-clients/ I don't see 1.0.0 jars. Would the jars be populated later ? Thanks On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > Hello Kafka users, develop

[VOTE] 1.0.0 RC0

2017-10-10 Thread Guozhang Wang
Hello Kafka users, developers and client-developers, This is the first candidate for release of Apache Kafka 1.0.0. It's worth noting that starting in this version we are using a different version protocol with three digits: *major.minor.bug-fix* Any and all testing is welcome, but the following