Thanks, all. I'm sorry, but I'm confused about what you're both suggesting to do. It sounds like this was a regression during refactoring, which makes sense (and makes me feel better that this bug wasn't released).
But are you suggesting to go back to just the `Joined` parameter for `repartitionForJoin`? Or are you ok with this proposal to have two params "repartition name" and "repartition serde"? Personally, I'm weakly in favor of the current implementation in my PR, since: * it doesn't require the construction of a new Joined that will just get discarded * in particular, Joined passes 3 pieces of information, but we only need 2 of them, * it also allows us to use the type system to prevent another regression of this nature in the future [ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5741 ] This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for devnull@infra.apache.org
