Thanks for the KIP! One meta question: Will users that are currently using the existing testing code with the "classifier:test" approach:
1) have access to the new testing utilities without updating the gradle.build file 2) can they continue to use the current testing code with the classifier approach? A question on the KIP itself. Since we have factory methods for creating `ConsumerRecord` objects where we can either override or use the default topic do we still all overloads on `ConsumerRecordFactory`? Maybe we could just have constructors specifying the default topic and users could provide "null" if not wanting to specify a topic when creating the `ConsumerRecordFactory`. Even though this is an initial KIP, I agree that adding some helper methods for result verification would be a good idea, but I don't think it should hold up the KIP process if we don't get to it on this pass. Otherwise, it's a +1 from me. Thanks, Bill On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Matthias, I made a pass over the wiki and left some comments; I see > you have addressed most of them. Here are a few more: > > 1. "TopologyTestDriver#process()": how about rename it to "pipeInput" or > "sendInput"? > > 2. For "ConsumerRecordFactory" constructor where "startTimestampMs" is not > specified, what would be the default value? > > > This is not a comment but just reminder: > > 3. ConsumerRecordFactory: I have to admit that putting this class in > o.a.k.streams.test may not be ideal, and if we are going to have an > o.a.k.clients.test in the future testing artifact this may better be moved > there. > > > Guozhang > > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Saïd Bouras <said.bou...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Matthias, > > > > I read the KIP and it will be very helpful thanks to the changes, I don't > > see though a part that handle topologies that use avro schemas, is it in > > the scope of the KIP ? > > > > I open an issue two month ago in the schema-registry repo : > > https://github.com/confluentinc/schema-registry/issues/651 that explain > > that when testing topologies using schema registry, the schema registry > > client mock is not thread safe and thus in the different processors nodes > > when deserializing it will not work... > > > > In my unit tests I wrapped the mock schema registry client into a > singleton > > but this solution is not enough satisfying. > > > > Thanks in advance, regards :-) > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:06 AM Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Kafka community, > > > > > > I want to propose KIP-247 to add public test utils to the Streams API. > > > The goal is to simplify testing of Kafka Streams applications. > > > > > > Please find details in the wiki: > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > > 247%3A+Add+public+test+utils+for+Kafka+Streams > > > > > > This is an initial KIP, and we hope to add more utility functions > later. > > > Thus, this KIP is not comprehensive but a first step. Of course, we can > > > enrich this initial KIP if we think it falls too short. But we should > > > not aim to be comprehensive to keep the scope manageable. > > > > > > In fact, I think we should add some more helpers to simplify result > > > verification. I will update the KIP with this asap. Just wanted to > start > > > the discussion early on. > > > > > > An initial WIP PR can be found here: > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4402 > > > > > > I also included the user-list (please hit "reply-all" to include both > > > lists in this KIP discussion). > > > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Saïd BOURAS > > > > Consultant Big Data > > Mobile: 0662988731 > > Zenika Paris > > 10 rue de Milan 75009 Paris > > Standard : +33(0)1 45 26 19 15 <+33(0)145261915> - Fax : +33(0)1 72 70 > 45 > > 10 > > <+33(0)172704510> > > > > > > -- > -- Guozhang >