The vote has passed with the following results:
4 binding votes from: Guozhang, José, Colin, and Jun
2 non-binding votes from: Ziming Deng and Kowshik
no -1 votes
Thanks to everyone for all the thoughtful feedback for this KIP.
Much appreciated!
-David
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 12:36 PM Jun Rao
Thanks, David. +1 from me.
Jun
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM David Arthur
wrote:
> Yes we'll need to bump ApiVersions request/response version to 4. I have a
> small note in the Public Interfaces that we'll drop MinVersionLevel in
> ApiVersionsResponse version 4.
>
> I believe we can avoid bu
Yes we'll need to bump ApiVersions request/response version to 4. I have a
small note in the Public Interfaces that we'll drop MinVersionLevel in
ApiVersionsResponse version 4.
I believe we can avoid bumping the version of FeatureLevelRecord since
KRaft doesn't support the UpgradeFeatures RPC (and
Hi, David,
Thanks for the KIP. It seems that we removed MinVersionLevel from ZK
and FeatureLevelRecord in the latest change. Should we
remove MinVersionLevel from ApiVersionsResponse too? Should we bump up the
version in FeatureLevelRecord and ApiVersionsRequest?
Jun
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 10:1
Thanks for the KIP, David! Great work.
+1 (binding).
Should the "./kafka-features.sh downgrade" command also have a --release flag,
to match upgrade?
Also, it seems like upgrade should have a --latest flag that upgrades
everything to the latest installed version?
best,
Colin
On Fri, Dec 10,
Hey David,
Thanks for the KIP! LGTM. +1.
I noticed the following minor issues while reading the KIP:
1. Should the versions of the "AllowDowngrade" be changed to "0-1"?
2. I think you meant --unsafe here:
> The controller validates that the cluster can be safely downgraded to this
> version (o
Hi David,
Excellent work. Looking forward to this KIP.
+1 (non-binding).
Cheers,
Kowshik
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 10:40 AM David Arthur
wrote:
> Hey all, I realized I omitted a small change to the public APIs regarding
> finalized feature versions. I've updated the KIP with these changes. Thi
Hey all, I realized I omitted a small change to the public APIs regarding
finalized feature versions. I've updated the KIP with these changes. This
does not conceptually change anything in the KIP, so I think we can just
continue with the vote.
Thanks!
David
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 1:34 AM Guozha
Thanks David! +1.
Guozhang
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 7:12 PM deng ziming
wrote:
> Hi, David
>
> Looking forwarding to this feature
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ziming Deng
>
> > On Dec 11, 2021, at 4:49 AM, David Arthur
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey everyone, I'd like to start a vote for KIP-778
Hi, David
Looking forwarding to this feature
+1 (non-binding)
Thanks!
Ziming Deng
> On Dec 11, 2021, at 4:49 AM, David Arthur wrote:
>
> Hey everyone, I'd like to start a vote for KIP-778 which adds support for
> KRaft to KRaft upgrades.
>
> Notably in this KIP is the first use case of KIP-
Hey everyone, I'd like to start a vote for KIP-778 which adds support for
KRaft to KRaft upgrades.
Notably in this KIP is the first use case of KIP-584 feature flags. As
such, there are some addendums to KIP-584 included.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-778%3A+KRaft+Upgrades
11 matches
Mail list logo