Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

elp > > us > > > to > > > > > > > >complete the platform story. The rest of the clients are built > > and > > > > > > > >maintained outside the project. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > &

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

> > >> > > > > > > >> There are also places that can live without Kafka Streams and > > > Kafka > > > > > > >> Connect. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Nacho > > > > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

n > > > those > > > > > >core > > > > > >> > functionalities evolve over time. Kafka Connect is in the same > > > > > >situation. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > For rest proxy, wh

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

> Stream > > > > >>and > > > > >> > Kafka Connect. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Jun > > > > >&

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

gt; > >> > > Is Apache Kafka Community only about the Core or does the apache > > > >> > community > > > >> > > also support some subprojects (and just we need some better way > to > > > >> manage > > > >>

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

>> > > >1. We can try to put all the small tools into the Apache > > >>Project. > > >> I > > >> > > >think this is not the right approach as there is simply too > > >>many > > >> of > > >> > > > them, > > >> > > >many in different langua

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

; > Each Module has a Module Management Committee(MMC), this is like > >almost > >> > > the PMC but at a per module basis. > >> > > > >> > > This MMC should essentially hold the binding votes for that module. > >> > > The MMC should be made up of a single representative

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

> > > A new Module is only capable of being added if the above >>requirements >> can >> > > be met (e.g. 3 people wishing to step up, from 3 organisations) so >that >> > > only actively support modules would be added >> > > >> > >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

organisations) so > that > > > > only actively support modules would be added > > > > > > > > The PMC reviews each module every 6months or Year. If MMC is > inactive, > > a > > > > vote/call to find replacements if raised, if

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

6months or Year. If MMC is inactive, > a > > > vote/call to find replacements if raised, if none are forthcoming > > dropping > > > the MMC to less than 3 then the module moves to "the attic" (very much > > like > > > apache attic but a little more aggressi

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

uys, so I'm wondering why you are concerned about whether the > > > community > > > > is > > > > > open to accepting patches or not." > > > > > > > > > > I think you are talking about contributing patches to this > repository > >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

> > We only add modules where some amount of active support and maintenance > > and use is provided by the community > > We have an automatic way to retire old or inactive projects. > > > > Thoughts? > > Mike > > > > > > _

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

d maintenance > and use is provided by the community > We have an automatic way to retire old or inactive projects. > > Thoughts? > Mike > > > ________________________ > From: Harsha Ch <harsha...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, October 20,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

patches being submitted > > by > > > > you > > > > > guys, so I'm wondering why you are concerned about whether the > > > community > > > > is > > > > > open to accepting patches or not." > > > > > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

to retire old or inactive projects. > > Thoughts? > Mike > > > ________________________ > From: Harsha Ch <harsha...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 10:26 PM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re:

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

d maintenance > and use is provided by the community > We have an automatic way to retire old or inactive projects. > > Thoughts? > Mike > > > ________________________ > From: Harsha Ch <harsha...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 10:26 PM > To: dev@kafka.a

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

om> > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Date: 20/10/2016 22:32 > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server > > Jay, > REST API is something every user is in need of. If the argument is to > clone and write your API, this will do a disservice to the users as they >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

Thoughts? Mike From: Harsha Ch <harsha...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 10:26 PM To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server Jay, REST API is something every user is in need of. If the argument is to

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

> > i > > > > personally am less likely to spend any of mine, or give project time > > > within > > > > my internal projects to developers contributing to another commercial > > > > companies project even so technically open source, as then ther

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

; source > > > projects. > > > > > > I can find many different implementations now of a rest endpoint on > > > GitHub, BitBucket etc. Each one has their benefits and disadvantages in > > > their implementation. By making / providing one this would bring > to

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

p and welcoming us to contribute to the project. It doesn't > > > > gurantee what we want to add in the furture will be in your roadmap. > > > > > > > > Hence the reason having it part of Kafka community will help a lot as > > > other > > > > users can participate in the discussions.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

any of mine, or give project time > > > within > > > > my internal projects to developers contributing to another commercial > > > > companies project even so technically open source, as then there is > > that > > > > commercial companies interest wil

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

t; thread, > > > i > > > > personally am less likely to spend any of mine, or give project time > > > within > > > > my internal projects to developers contributing to another commercial > > > > companies project even so technically open source, a

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

rested, but I think the whole governance thing > is a > > > big barrier to engagement. And it's looking like it's getting out of > > date. > > > > > > In technical terms, I can think of two big improvements to the REST > > proxy. > > > First, it needs t

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

ST proxy > > to which it first connected. Kafka itself avoids this kind of affinity > for > > good reason, and in the name of availability the REST proxy should too. > > These are natural KIPs. > > > > I think it would be good to have the code for the REST proxy contribu

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

g more > surface area for every client. But something like REST is universal and > worthy to be owned by the community. > > Mike > > > > From: Andrew Schofield <andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> > Sent: Saturday, October 8, 201

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

ctober 8, 2016 1:19 AM To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server There's a massive difference between the governance of Kafka and the governance of the REST proxy. In Kafka, there is a broad community of people contributing their opinions about future enhanc

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

to be developed in the same way. Andrew Schofield From: Suresh Srinivas <sur...@hortonworks.com> Sent: 07 October 2016 22:41:52 To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server   ASF already gives us a clear framework and governance model for community devel

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

ASF already gives us a clear framework and governance model for community development. This is already understood by the people contributing to Apache Kafka project, and they are the same people who want to contribute to the REST server capability as well. Everyone is in agreement on the need for

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

Harsha/Mani, I completely agree that adding admin API support and security are important features for the Kafka REST proxy. Luckily the roadmap items that you mentioned as being important for a Kafka REST proxy server are exactly the ones the community working on this REST proxy want to add to it

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

Ofir, … " personally think it would be quite wasteful to re-implement the REST gateway just because that an actively-maintained piece of Apache-licensed software is not governed directly by the Apache Kafka community... While kafka-rest repo is owned by Confluent, the contributors including

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

Ofir, " personally think it would be quite wasteful to re-implement the REST gateway just because that an actively-maintained piece of Apache-licensed software is not governed directly by the Apache Kafka community... While kafka-rest repo is owned by Confluent, the contributors including the

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

Hi Manikumar, I agree totally agree that REST is important. What I don't understand is why we'd duplicate the existing REST interface inside the Kafka project. That seems to needlessly fragment things. -Jay On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Manikumar wrote: > Hi Jay,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

I personally think it would be quite wasteful to re-implement the REST gateway just because that an actively-maintained piece of Apache-licensed software is not governed directly by the Apache Kafka community... While kafka-rest repo is owned by Confluent, the contributors including the main one

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

gt; Harsha Chintalapani <ka...@harsha.io> wrote on 02/10/2016 21:23:15: > > > From: Harsha Chintalapani <ka...@harsha.io> > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Date: 02/10/2016 21:23 > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server > > > > Neha & Jay,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

;ka...@harsha.io> wrote on 02/10/2016 21:23:15: > From: Harsha Chintalapani <ka...@harsha.io> > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Date: 02/10/2016 21:23 > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server > > Neha & Jay, > We did look at the open source a

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-80: Kafka REST Server

Hi Jay, Thanks for your reply. I agree that we can not add all the clients/tools available in ecosystem page to Kafka repo itself. But we feel REST Interface is different from other clients/tools. Since any language that can work with HTTP can easily integrate with this interface, Having an