Hi Jason
Thank you for helpful comments. I updated wiki based on your advice.
I thought this option was relatively common and making maintenance easy was
also important.
However, as you said, it is not good that version option won't be shown up in
help description.
I thought accepting both single-dash and double-dash will help to find this
option.
In my approach this option won't be showed, but most of software which has this
option accepts either single-dash or double-dash.
I guess it doesn't need to support both if we take another way.
Thanks
@Ted Yeah, you're right. Sorry about the confusion.
Since we're here, I think this KIP is a nice improvement. It's definitely
nice to have an easy way to check the version. That said, do we really need
to support both `-version` and `--version`? The latter is consistent with
our current tools.
Also, I think the approach we've taken is basically to build the --version
functionality into the bash script. This is nice because it saves a lot of
work to update the commands individually and we don't need to do anything
when we add new tools. The downside is that `--version` won't show up as an
option in any of the --help output. Not sure if that is too big of a
problem, but maybe worth mentioning this in the rejected alternatives
section.
-Jason
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
Jason:
Maybe your reply was intended for another KIP ?
KIP-278 is about adding version option, not timeout.
Cheers
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
wrote:
Hi Sasaki,
Thanks for the KIP. I think the timeout controls the maximum allowed
time
that the consumer will block for the next record. Maybe the meaning
would
be clearer with the more concise name `--timeout`? That also fits with
the
old consumer which overrides the `consumer.timeout.ms` property.
By the way, it seems like the default value was intentionally set low
for
both the old and new consumers, but I'm not sure of the reason. We could
leave the default as it is if we want to be safe, but increasing it
seems
ok to me. Perhaps we could start a little lower, though, say 10 seconds?
In
any case, we should make it clear to the user that the timeout was
reached.
It's surprising to see only the incomplete reported results following a
timeout.
Thanks,
Jason
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 4:37 AM, Sasaki Toru <sasaki...@oss.nttdata.com>
wrote:
Hello everyone,
I would like to start a discussion for KIP 278. Cloud you please give
comments and advice ?
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-278+-
+Add+version+option+to+Kafka%27s+commands>
JIRA ticket and Pull Request are bellow:
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-2061>
<https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/639>
Many thanks,
Sasaki
--
Sasaki Toru(sasaki...@oss.nttdata.com) NTT DATA CORPORATION
--
Sasaki Toru(sasaki...@oss.nttdata.com) NTT DATA CORPORATION
