Personally, I prefer KafkaStreams just because it sounds nicer. For the reasons identified above, KafkaProcessor or KProcessor is more apt but sounds less catchy (IMO). I also think we should prefix with Kafka (rather than K) because we will then have 3 clients: KafkaProducer, KafkaConsumer and KafkaProcessor which is very nice and consistent.
Aditya On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Gwen Shapira <gshap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > I think its also a matter of intent. If we see it as "yet another > client library", than Processor (to match Producer and Consumer) will > work great. > If we see it is a stream processing framework, the name has to start > with S to follow existing convention. > > Speaking of naming conventions: > You know how people have stack names for technologies that are usually > used in tandem? ELK, LAMP, etc. > The pattern of Kafka -> Stream Processor -> NoSQL Store is super > common. KSN stack doesn't sound right, though. Maybe while we are > bikeshedding, someone has ideas in that direction :) > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Sriram Subramanian > <srsubraman...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > > I had the same thought. Kafka processor, KProcessor or even Kafka > > stream processor is more relevant. > > > > > > > >> On Jul 30, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Martin Kleppmann <mar...@kleppmann.com> > wrote: > >> > >> I'm with Sriram -- Kafka is all about streams already (or topics, to be > precise, but we're calling it "stream processing" not "topic processing"), > so I find "Kafka Streams", "KStream" and "Kafka Streaming" all confusing, > since they seem to imply that other bits of Kafka are not about streams. > >> > >> I would prefer "The Processor API" or "Kafka Processors" or "Kafka > Processing Client" or "KProcessor", or something along those lines. > >> > >>> On 30 Jul 2015, at 15:07, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I would vote for KStream as it sounds sexier (is it only me??), second > to > >>> that would be Kafka Streaming. > >>> > >>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Jay Kreps <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Also, the most important part of any prototype, we should have a name > for > >>>> this producing-consumer-thingamgigy: > >>>> > >>>> Various ideas: > >>>> - Kafka Streams > >>>> - KStream > >>>> - Kafka Streaming > >>>> - The Processor API > >>>> - Metamorphosis > >>>> - Transformer API > >>>> - Verwandlung > >>>> > >>>> For my part I think what people are trying to do is stream processing > with > >>>> Kafka so I think something that evokes Kafka and stream processing is > >>>> preferable. I like Kafka Streams or Kafka Streaming followed by > KStream. > >>>> > >>>> Transformer kind of makes me think of the shape-shifting cars. > >>>> > >>>> Metamorphosis is cool and hilarious but since we are kind of > envisioning > >>>> this as more limited scope thing rather than a massive framework in > its own > >>>> right I actually think it should have a descriptive name rather than a > >>>> personality of it's own. > >>>> > >>>> Anyhow let the bikeshedding commence. > >>>> > >>>> -Jay > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi all, > >>>>> > >>>>> I just posted KIP-28: Add a transform client for data processing > >>>>> < > >>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-28+-+Add+a+transform+client+for+data+processing > >>>>> . > >>>>> > >>>>> The wiki page does not yet have the full design / implementation > details, > >>>>> and this email is to kick-off the conversation on whether we should > add > >>>>> this new client with the described motivations, and if yes what > features > >>>> / > >>>>> functionalities should be included. > >>>>> > >>>>> Looking forward to your feedback! > >>>>> > >>>>> -- Guozhang > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> -- Guozhang > >> >
