Thanks Colin, I think this is a good improvement. Ashish, some of the concerns with regards to KAFKA-3600 were related to the cost versus benefit. Once one adds client compatibility, the benefit is much higher. I would be happy to review and merge KAFKA-3600 if we think it serves as a good first step towards client compatibility (if the vote for this passes). Colin, maybe you can review the PR for KAFKA-3600 and see if you can build on that? Ashish, it may be worth merging trunk into your branch and fixing the conflicts.
Ismael On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Ashish Singh <asi...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Hello Colin, > > In the KIP you mentioned that currently the client uses supported api > versions information to check if the server supports its desired versions. > Not sure, if that is true. I had put together a PR for KAFKA-3600, to do > that, but it never went in. Also, I could not find how you plan to perform > version check on client side. In KAFKA-3600, I am maintaining api version > for each live connection, and that made a few folks think it is too big of > a change. > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Sorry, that link should be: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > > 97%3A+Improved+Kafka+Client+RPC+Compatibility+Policy > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016, at 11:04, Colin McCabe wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I've been thinking about a KIP to improve the Kafka client's > > > compatibility policy. If you're interested, please check out: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > > 97%3A+Improved+Kafka+Compatibility+Policy > > > > > > cheers, > > > Colin > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > Ashish >
