Hi Jun, Thanks for your comment. These things are never straightforward because of history.
There are broadly speaking the following classes of CLI tools. 1) Console producer/consumer Support in-line properties and config files using --producer-property and --producer.config, and the equivalent for the consumer tools. The KIP currently proposes --producer.config and --consumer.config are replaced with --command-config. It retains --producer-property and --consumer-property. Now, --property is already used by the console consumer in order to set properties for the formatter. I don't think we can move to simply --property for other properties. It would be possible to change --producer-property and --consumer-property to --command-property. There is already --formatter-config, which would align with --formatter-property if we chose to use that instead of just --property. 2) Verifiable producer/consumer When there was just the verifiable producer and consumer, using --producer.config and --consumer.config was relatively easy to understand because the config was for the producer or consumer respectively. However, with the share consumer, the admin client is also used, so --consumer.config would have been slightly inaccurate and we used --command-config instead. This KIP proposes --command-config for all of these. 3) Performance tests Support in-line properties and config files using --producer.props and --producer.config (and consumer equivalents). The KIP currently proposes --producer.config and --consumer.config are replaced with --command-config, and that --producer.props is replaced by --producer-property. It would be possible to change --producer-property and --consumer-property to --command-property. 4) Everything else Support config files only with a variety of flags today. The KIP proposes --command-config. Was this the kind of thing you were thinking? Do you think --command-property is worth the change? How about --formatter-property? Or maybe something else? Thanks, Andrew ________________________________________ From: Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io.INVALID> Sent: 13 August 2025 19:28 To: dev@kafka.apache.org <dev@kafka.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1147: Improve consistency of command-line arguments Hi, Andrew, Thanks for the KIP. If we are replacing --consumer.config with --command-config, should we do the same for --consumer-property for consistency? Jun On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 9:21 AM Andrew Schofield < andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote: > Hi Jiunn, > Thanks for your comment. > > Jiunn_00: I was not really familiar with this script, and it's pretty > user-hostile > because you cannot see the command-line options unless you choose one > of the subcommands. This is why it was not in the KIP. When I tried it out, > it was not apparent that --config existed. However, I think you're right > and > I have added this to the KIP also. > > Thanks, > Andrew > ________________________________________ > From: 黃竣陽 <s7133...@gmail.com> > Sent: 13 August 2025 16:16 > To: dev@kafka.apache.org <dev@kafka.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1147: Improve consistency of command-line > arguments > > Hello Andrew, > > Jiunn_00: The kafka-cluster.sh script also has the --config argument. > Should we > align this with --command-config for consistency? > > Best Regards, > Jiunn-Yang > > Andrew Schofield <andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> 於 2025年8月13日 > 晚上11:06 寫道: > > > > Hi Chia-Ping, > > It's come to my attention that I completely missed a set of comments > from you > > on this KIP. Please accept my apologies. > > > >>> chia_00: Should we introduce `--consumer-property` to > `kafka-consumer-perf-test.sh` and > >>> `kafka-share-consumer-perf-test.sh` since another perf tool, > `kafka-producer-perf-test.sh`, has `--producer-property`? > > > > Yes, good idea. Added to the KIP. > > > >>> chia_01: should we align the naming of "how many records"? > `kafka-producer-perf-test.sh` uses `num-records`, > >>> while `kafka-consumer-perf-test.sh` and > `kafka-share-consumer-perf-test.sh` use `messages`. > > > > I think this is a sensible alignment. My view is that we generally use > "record" in Kafka, so I suggest > > deprecating `messages` in the two consumer tools and replacing with > `num-records`. > > > >>> chia_02: Have you considering adding `reporting-interval` to > `kafka-producer-perf-test.sh`? > > > > I had not but this is quite a straightforward thing to do. It has a > reporting interval but just lacks > > the ability to configure it. I've added it to the KIP. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Andrew > > ________________________________________ > > From: Federico Valeri <fedeval...@gmail.com> > > Sent: 17 July 2025 09:50 > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org <dev@kafka.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1147: Improve consistency of command-line > arguments > > > > Hi Andrew, thanks for this useful KIP. > > > > This is something that I also though while working on tools migration > > from Scala to Java, but that wasn't the right time. > > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 6:18 PM Andrew Schofield > > <andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Kirk, > >> Thanks for your email. > >> > >> KT01: During the migration period, using both --producer-props and > --producer-property > >> is an error. If they use --producer-props, it works and they get a > deprecation warning. > >> If they use --producer-property, it works with no warning. I have > updated the KIP > >> accordingly. > >> > >> I don't really like --command-config either, but I don't think it's > ambiguous as such. It's > >> just a bit generic to my way of thinking. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Andrew > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: Kirk True <k...@kirktrue.pro> > >> Sent: 10 July 2025 02:06 > >> To: dev@kafka.apache.org <dev@kafka.apache.org> > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1147: Improve consistency of command-line > arguments > >> > >> Hi Andrew, > >> > >> Thanks for the KIP. Yes, the inconsistency drives me crazy :) > >> > >> Just one initial question: > >> > >> KT01: During the migration period where both command line arguments are > supported (e.g. --producer-props and --producer-property), which takes > precedence? > >> > >> I'm not ecstatic about the existing naming of "--command-config" > because it's ambiguous, but that's a battle for another day... > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Kirk > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 9, 2025, at 6:53 AM, Andrew Schofield wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> I'd like to start discussion of KIP-1147. This KIP aligns the names of > the command-line > >>> arguments across all of the Apache Kafka command-line tools. > >>> > >>> KIP: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1147%3A+Improve+consistency+of+command-line+arguments > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Andrew >