Github user rmetzger commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1039#issuecomment-133478852
Damn. You are right. I'll add the full type parameters again for the 0.9.1
backport (once this one is merged).
> Should we even differentiate between them, or only port the
PersistentKafkaSource to extend the FlinkKafkaConsumer
That's a good question. I though that having the two user-facing classes
would allow us to "silently" change the implementation for the different Kafka
versions if needed (for example when the new consumer API is out, and we know
its fully backwards compatible).
But I guess this is a matter of taste. I can change the name to
FlinkKafkaConsumer (without the version suffix) if you want.
Do you think having two `PersistentKafkaSource` in different packages is a
good idea?
I don't know whether Sink / Source or Producer / Consumer are better pairs
of names.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
