bq. deprecations that are added in 1.x (x>0) have to remain in all 2.y Makes sense.
It is fine to exclude KIP-113 from your KIP. Thanks On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Ted, > > Thanks for the feedback! > > bq. topic.action.policy.class.name > > > > Since the policy would cover more than one action, how about using > actions > > for the second word ? > > > > Good point, done. > > > > For TopicState interface, the abstract modifier for its methods are not > > needed. > > > > Fixed. > > bq. KIP-113 > > > > Mind adding more to the above bullet ? > > > > I guess I intended to elaborate on this, but forgot to. I guess the > question is: > > a) Whether AlterReplicaDir should be covered by a policy, and if so > b) should it be covered by this policy. > > Thinking about it some more I don't think it should be covered by this > policy, so I have removed this bullet. Please shout if you disagree. > > > > bq. If this KIP is accepted for Kafka 1.1.0 this removal could happen in > > Kafka 3.0.0 > > > > There would be no Kafka 2.0 ? > > > > As I understand it, a deprecation has to exist for a complete major version > number cycle before the feature can be removed. So deprecations that are > added in 1.x (x>0) have to remain in all 2.y before removal in 3. Did I > understand the policy wrong? >
