I don't think we need a KIP/vote here, this is just an internal refactoring. We had said previously and noted in the document that the KIPs were just for big new features or public api changes.
I am a big +1 on the idea. We'll have to be careful in the code review since it would really easy to cause subtle issues and it is hard to review this kind of change. For what it is worth the high-level idea of adding a bunch of helper code in org.apache.kafka.common is to start to incorporate this on the server and replace the utilities there. This will just help reduce the total code size. A few of the highlights there are: 1. Replace kafka.utils.Utils with o.a.k.common.utils.Utils. This will likely involve some thought and refactoring. Anything non-general purpose should move out of Utils entirely and anything that remains should be high quality, general purpose, and have some tests. We may want to keep a ScalaUtils with a couple of things that aren't really doable/convenient in Java. This should be straight-forward. 2. Refactor the network server to make use of the classes in o.a.k.common.network (receive, send, etc). It might be doable to make use of Selector as well. 3. Replace the request classes in kafka.api with the ones in o.a.k.common.requests. This is one of the more valuable things we can do as that will get us to having a single definition of the protocol. 4. Make use of the exceptions in o.a.k.common.errors 5. Switch over to the new metrics library. I'll file tickets for these. -Jay On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Joe Stein <joe.st...@stealth.ly> wrote: > I created KIP-12 > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-12+change+broker+configuration+properties+to+be+consistent+with+the+rest+of+the+code > and linked it to this thread and the JIRA with the v1 patch. The rebased > version with updates for the current review should be ready to review in > the next few days. > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jeff Holoman <jholo...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > I think this is a good change. Is there general agreement that we are > > moving forward with this approach? It would be nice to start using this > for > > future work. > > > > Thanks > > > > Jeff > > > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Joe Stein <joe.st...@stealth.ly> wrote: > > > > > I updated the RB changing some of the HIGH to MEDIUM and LOW. > > > > > > There might be other or different opinions and they may change over > time > > so > > > I don't really see h/m/l as a blocker to the patch going in. > > > > > > It would be great to take all the rb feedback from today and then > > tomorrow > > > rebase and include changes for a new patch. > > > > > > Then over the next day or two review, test and commit to trunk (or > > re-work > > > if necessary). > > > > > > /******************************************* > > > Joe Stein > > > Founder, Principal Consultant > > > Big Data Open Source Security LLC > > > http://www.stealth.ly > > > Twitter: @allthingshadoop <http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop> > > > ********************************************/ > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Andrii Biletskyi < > > > andrii.bilets...@stealth.ly> wrote: > > > > > > > It'd be great to have it on trunk. > > > > As I mentioned under jira ticket (KAFKA-1845) current implementation > > > lacks > > > > correct Importance settings. > > > > I'd be grateful if somebody could help me with it (a simple mapping > > > between > > > > config setting and importance or comments right in the review board > > would > > > > suffice). > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andrii Biletskyi > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Gwen Shapira <gshap...@cloudera.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Strong +1 from me (obviously). Lots of good reasons to do it: > > > > > consistency, code reuse, better validations, etc, etc. > > > > > > > > > > I had one comment on the patch in RB, but it can also be refactored > > as > > > > > follow up JIRA to avoid blocking everyone who is waiting on this. > > > > > > > > > > Gwen > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Joe Stein <joe.st...@stealth.ly> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hey, I wanted to start a quick convo around some changes on > trunk. > > > Not > > > > > sure > > > > > > this requires a KIP since it is kind of internal and shouldn't > > affect > > > > > users > > > > > > but we can decide if so and link this thread to that KIP if so > (and > > > > keep > > > > > > the discussion going on the thread if makes sense). > > > > > > > > > > > > Before making any other broker changes I wanted to see what folks > > > > thought > > > > > > about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1845 ConfigDec > > > > patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree it will be nice to standardize and use one configuration > > and > > > > > > validation library across the board. It helps in a lot of > different > > > > > changes > > > > > > we have been discussing also in 0.8.3 and think we should make > sure > > > it > > > > is > > > > > > what we want if so then: review, commit and keep going. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > /******************************************* > > > > > > Joe Stein > > > > > > Founder, Principal Consultant > > > > > > Big Data Open Source Security LLC > > > > > > http://www.stealth.ly > > > > > > Twitter: @allthingshadoop < > http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop > > > > > > > > > ********************************************/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jeff Holoman > > Systems Engineer > > >
