Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Node.js Client Release 1.8.1 Candidate 1

Hi, I'm having issues while validating the fix related to the hostname verification: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/pull/126 My usecase is with a valid TLS certificate signed by a CA (not a self-signed one). My code is very simple (see below): it creates a client with token auth +

Re: [VOTE][PIP-242] Topic name restriction

This PIP has passed voting. 5 (binding) and 4 (non-binding) +1 (binding) • Yunze Xu • Penghui Li • Guo jiwei • Haiting Jiang • Cong Bo +1 (non-binding) • Asaf Mesika • Cong Zhao • Zike Yang • avinash kala Thanks to you all, Let's meet at the next PIP. Best, Mattison On Feb 18, 2023, 16:58

Re: [DISCUSS] ClientVersion conflict across multiple language client

+1 - I think this is a helpful change. We already do this in the Java Admin http client when we set the user agent [0]. > But I'm wondering if it's possible to support configuring the client > version string by users? This is always the case because we support third party clients. In my view,

Re: Does anyone build UI for Pulsar?

Kiryl, > Just make a side-by-side comparison of Pulsar Manager with any of the following options: > - Conduktor (Commercial). > - Kafka UI by Provectus (Apache License 2.0). > - Redpanda Console (ex-Kowl) (Mixed license). > > I see a significant gap in user experience between any of them and the

Re: [DISCUSS] ClientVersion conflict across multiple language client

+1 But I'm wondering if it's possible to support configuring the client version string by users? For example, if users forked their own client, they might want to differ the client version with the official client. The disadvantage could be that users can configure any version string as they

Re: [PROPOSAL] Roadmap for 3.0 release

+1 Thanks for driving this effort! Also, I created https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/19570 to correspondingly update our website. Feel free to leave a comment. I'm going to send a draft in days. Best, tison. Enrico Olivelli 于2023年2月21日周二 19:20写道： > +1 > > Perfect > > Enrico > > Il

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-246: Improved PROTOBUF_NATIVE schema compatibility checks without using avro-protobuf

About Proto3 and Proto2: 1. *schema compatibility checking for proto3* Proto3 canceled the required field, so in the current design, there is no need to check the required field. We can get the syntax of proto in the code, and skip the check of the required field if it is proto3. All other

Re: [DISCUSS] ClientVersion conflict across multiple language client

+1 Enrico Il giorno mar 21 feb 2023 alle ore 10:23 Baodi Shi ha scritto: > > +1, Good idea. > > Thanks, > Baodi Shi > > > 在 2023年2月21日 15:24:45 上，avinash kala 写道： > > > +1, sounds good. > > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 12:39 PM Zixuan Liu wrote: > > > > +1, good idea! > > > > > > Thanks, > > >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Roadmap for 3.0 release

+1 Perfect Enrico Il giorno mar 21 feb 2023 alle ore 08:11 Haiting Jiang ha scritto: > > +1 Looks great! > > > Haiting > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:11 PM Hang Chen wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > Thanks, > > Hang > > > > Christophe Bornet 于2023年2月20日周一 21:46写道： > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Also,

Re: [VOTE][PIP-242] Topic name restriction

+1 binding avinash kala 于2023年2月21日周二 15:21写道： > > +1 > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 12:44 PM Haiting Jiang wrote: > > > +1 binding > > > > Haiting > > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 3:07 PM guo jiwei wrote: > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > Jiwei Guo (Tboy) > > > > > > On Mon,

Re: [DISCUSS] ClientVersion conflict across multiple language client

+1, Good idea. Thanks, Baodi Shi 在 2023年2月21日 15:24:45 上，avinash kala 写道： > +1, sounds good. > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 12:39 PM Zixuan Liu wrote: > > +1, good idea! > > > Thanks, > > Zixuan > > > Zike Yang 于2023年2月21日周二 11:33写道： > > > > Hi, all > > > > > > Currently, the Pulsar broker uses