Thanks Pierre. Including the dev mailing list. A few comments:
1. It's worth mentioning that the KafkaConsumer has the @InterfaceStability.Unstable annotation. 2. It would be good to show the existing signatures of the methods being changed before we show the changed signatures. 3. The proposed changes section mentions an alternative. I think the alternative should be moved to the "Rejected Alternatives" section. 4. It would be good to explain why `Collection` was chosen specifically for the parameters (as opposed to `Iterable` for example).\ 5. Finally, it would be good to explain why we decided to change the method parameters instead of the return types (or why we should not change the return types). Hopefully it should be straightforward to address these points. Thanks, Ismael On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Pierre-Yves Ritschard <p...@spootnik.org> wrote: > > KAFKA-3006 is under review, and would change some commonly used > signatures in the Kafka client library. The idea behind the proposal is > to provide a unified way of interacting with anything sequence like in > the client. > > If the change is accepted, these would be the signatures that change: > > void subscribe(Collection<String> topics); > void subscribe(Collection<String> topics, ConsumerRebalanceListener); > void assign(Collection<TopicPartition> partitions); > void pause(Collection<TopicPartition> partitions); > void resume(Collection<TopicPartition> partitions); > void seekToBeginning(Collection<TopicPartition>); > void seekToEnd(Collection<TopicPartition>); > >
