Guozhang,

Did you look at the PR? I'm fine with doing that if we really think it's
better, but since this is a config-less passthrough, it's actually just
adding overhead to do that...

-Ewen

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Ewen,
>
> "use the corresponding serializer internally and just add in the extra
> conversion
> steps for the data API" sounds good to me.
>
> Guozhang
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava <e...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
>
> > It's a different interface that's being implemented. The functionality is
> > the same (since it's just a simple pass through), but we intentionally
> > named Converters differently than Serializers since they do more work
> than
> > Serializers (besides the normal serialization they also need to convert
> > between <serialization format> and the Connect Data API.
> >
> > We could certainly reuse/extend that class instead, though I'm not sure
> > there's much benefit in that and since they implement different
> interfaces
> > and this is Connect-specific, it will probably be clearer to have it
> under
> > a Connect package. Note that for other Converters the pattern we've used
> is
> > to use the corresponding serializer internally and just add in the extra
> > conversion steps for the data API.
> >
> > -Ewen
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm wondering why we can't just use ByteArarySerde in o.a.k.common?
> > >
> > > Guozhang
> > >
> > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava <
> > e...@confluent.io>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I've added a pretty trivial KIP for adding a pass-through Converter
> for
> > > > Kafka Connect, similar to ByteArraySerializer/Deserializer.
> > > >
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > > > 128%3A+Add+ByteArrayConverter+for+Kafka+Connect
> > > >
> > > > This wasn't added with the framework originally because the idea was
> to
> > > > deal with structured data for the most part. However, we've seen a
> > couple
> > > > of use cases arise as the framework got more traction and I think it
> > > makes
> > > > sense to provide this out of the box now so people stop reinventing
> the
> > > > wheel (and using a different fully-qualified class name) for each
> > > connector
> > > > that needs this functionality.
> > > >
> > > > I imagine this will be a rather uncontroversial addition, so if I
> don't
> > > see
> > > > any comments in the next day or two I'll just start the vote thread.
> > > >
> > > > -Ewen
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -- Guozhang
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -- Guozhang
>

Reply via email to