SslFactory is not a public interface for others to use. EchoServer is internal testing. We should make these as proposed in rejected alternatives to SslFactory and DefaultSslFactory. I don’t see any one using a internal class as public API.
-Harsha On Oct 19, 2018, 3:47 PM -0700, Pellerin, Clement <clement_pelle...@ibi.com>, wrote: > > > Can you explain why calling SslFactory and DefaultSslFactory cause any > > > issues. > > When you say "calling", I guess you mean "naming". > > Renaming SslFactory will only cause backwards compatibility issues for > applications that refer to it directly. EchoServer is an example, but maybe > that is just an artificial test. > You make it sound like SslFactory was never part of the public API. I cannot > make that judgement just by looking at the code. > > I don't mind using the better names if the Kafka community thinks no Kafka > application calls SslFactory directly. I would like more opinions on this > though. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Harsha Chintalapani [mailto:ka...@harsha.io] > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 5:55 PM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-383 Pluggable interface for SSL Factory > > Hi, > Overall the KIP looks good to me. > > "Ideally, the interface should be called SslFactory and the built-in > implementation should be called DefaultSslFactory. This was rejected to > improve backwards compatibility for applications that call the SslFactory > directly.” > > Can you explain why calling SslFactory and DefaultSslFactory cause any > issues. For clients the config will point to DefaultSslFactory and similarly > on broker side as well. Not sure which cases it will break the backward > compatability. > > -Harsha > On Oct 19, 2018, 1:48 PM -0700, Pellerin, Clement <clement_pelle...@ibi.com>, > wrote: > > I have updated the KIP to use a default constructor in the pluggable SSL > > Factory implementation. > > I also changed the name of the config to ssl.sslfactory.class and fixed a > > typo in the constant names. > > I would like your feedback on this version of the KIP. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pellerin, Clement > > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 3:11 PM > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Subject: [DISCUSS] KIP-383 Pluggable interface for SSL Factory > > > > I would like feedback on this proposal to make it possible to replace > > SslFactory with a custom implementation. > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-383%3A++Pluggable+interface+for+SSL+Factory > >
