Yeah I totally agree `partition_max_bytes` is a better name than `max_bytes`. I am wondering if it is better to change the field name for FetchRequest V9 only and keep the name unchanged for FetchRequest V8 and earlier. The benefit of this approach is that developers (both Kafka developer and other library developer) can keep track of the evaluation of the schema (both its structure and field name change). Are you concerned that this would cause confusion if the field name is different for different versions of the schema in `FetchRequest.java`?
I was thinking that field name is part of API because field name is used by developer to identify the request/response schema even though field name is not used by Kafka server code to identify the schema. I may be overly worried. It will be great if we can have input from one more developer to comment on this. What do you think? [ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5564 ] This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for [email protected]
