Thank you all for voting!
This KIP is accepted with
- 1 non-binding +1 (Leah)
- 4 binding +1 (John, Sophie, Matthias, Guozhang)
Best,
Bruno
On 28.01.21 18:13, Guozhang Wang wrote:
+1 again from me.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 8:06 AM John Roesler wrote:
Thank you for the KIP, Bruno!
I'm +1
+1 again from me.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 8:06 AM John Roesler wrote:
> Thank you for the KIP, Bruno!
>
> I'm +1 (binding)
>
> -John
>
> On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 14:18 -0600, Leah Thomas wrote:
> > Hi Bruno,
> > I'm still +1, non-binding. Thanks for the updates!
> >
> > Leah
> >
> > On Wed, Jan
Thank you for the KIP, Bruno!
I'm +1 (binding)
-John
On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 14:18 -0600, Leah Thomas wrote:
> Hi Bruno,
> I'm still +1, non-binding. Thanks for the updates!
>
> Leah
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 1:56 PM Matthias J. Sax wrote:
>
> > Thanks for updating the KIP.
> >
> > +1
Hi Bruno,
I'm still +1, non-binding. Thanks for the updates!
Leah
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 1:56 PM Matthias J. Sax wrote:
> Thanks for updating the KIP.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 1/27/21 10:19 AM, Bruno Cadonna wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Thanks for voting!
> >
> > I updated the
Thanks for updating the KIP.
+1 (binding)
-Matthias
On 1/27/21 10:19 AM, Bruno Cadonna wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for voting!
>
> I updated the KIP with some additional feedback I got.
>
> If I do not hear anything from folks that have already voted in the next
> couple of days, I will
Hi all,
Thanks for voting!
I updated the KIP with some additional feedback I got.
If I do not hear anything from folks that have already voted in the next
couple of days, I will assume their vote is still valid. You can also
confirm your vote if you want.
KIP:
Thanks for the KIP Bruno, +1 (binding)
Sophie
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 11:23 AM Guozhang Wang wrote:
> Hey Bruno,
>
> Thanks for your response!
>
> 1) Yup I'm good with option a) as well.
> 2) Thanks!
> 3) Sounds good to me. I think it would not change any StreamThread
> implementation
Hey Bruno,
Thanks for your response!
1) Yup I'm good with option a) as well.
2) Thanks!
3) Sounds good to me. I think it would not change any StreamThread
implementation regarding capturing exceptions from consumer.poll() since it
captures StreamsException as fatal.
Guozhang
On Wed, Dec 16,
Hi Guozhang,
Thank for the feedback!
Please find my answers inline.
Best,
Bruno
On 14.12.20 23:33, Guozhang Wang wrote:
Hello Bruno,
Just a few more questions about the KIP:
1) If the internal topics exist but the calculated num.partitions do not
match the existing topics, what would
Hello Bruno,
Just a few more questions about the KIP:
1) If the internal topics exist but the calculated num.partitions do not
match the existing topics, what would Streams do;
2) Since `init()` is a blocking call (we only return after all topics are
confirmed to be created), should we have a
Thanks, Bruno!
I'm +1 (binding)
-John
On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 09:57 -0600, Leah Thomas wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP Bruno, LGTM. +1 (non-binding)
>
> Cheers,
> Leah
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 4:29 AM Bruno Cadonna wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to start the voting on KIP-698 that proposes
Thanks for the KIP Bruno, LGTM. +1 (non-binding)
Cheers,
Leah
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 4:29 AM Bruno Cadonna wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to start the voting on KIP-698 that proposes an explicit user
> initialization of broker-side state for Kafka Streams instead of letting
> Kafka Streams setting
Hi,
I'd like to start the voting on KIP-698 that proposes an explicit user
initialization of broker-side state for Kafka Streams instead of letting
Kafka Streams setting up the broker-side state automatically during
rebalance. Such an explicit initialization avoids possible data loss
issues
13 matches
Mail list logo
