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

2016-11-04 Thread Manikumar
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

2016-10-26 Thread Guozhang Wang
> > >> > > > > > > >> There are also places that can live without Kafka Streams and > > > Kafka > > > > > > >> Connect. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Nacho > > > > > >

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

2016-10-25 Thread Ewen Cheslack-Postava
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

2016-10-25 Thread Ben Davison
> Stream > > > > >>and > > > > >> > Kafka Connect. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Jun > > > > >&

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

2016-10-24 Thread Ismael Juma
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

2016-10-24 Thread Ben Davison
>> > > >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

2016-10-24 Thread Jay Kreps
; > 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

2016-10-24 Thread Suresh Srinivas
> > > 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

2016-10-22 Thread Nacho Solis
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

2016-10-21 Thread Harsha Chintalapani
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

2016-10-21 Thread Sriram Subramanian
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

2016-10-21 Thread Nacho Solis
> > 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

2016-10-21 Thread Jun Rao
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

2016-10-21 Thread Jay Kreps
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

2016-10-21 Thread Michael Pearce
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

2016-10-21 Thread Ismael Juma
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

2016-10-21 Thread Edoardo Comar
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

2016-10-21 Thread Michael Pearce
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

2016-10-20 Thread Jason Gustafson
> > 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

2016-10-20 Thread Harsha Ch
; 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

2016-10-20 Thread Harsha Chintalapani
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

2016-10-16 Thread Jungtaek Lim
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

2016-10-16 Thread Jay Kreps
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

2016-10-12 Thread Nacho Solis
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

2016-10-12 Thread Jay Kreps
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

2016-10-11 Thread Harsha Chintalapani
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

2016-10-08 Thread Michael Pearce
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

2016-10-07 Thread Andrew Schofield
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

2016-10-07 Thread Suresh Srinivas
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

2016-10-07 Thread Neha Narkhede
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

2016-10-07 Thread Harsha Chintalapani
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

2016-10-07 Thread Harsha Ch
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

2016-10-06 Thread Jay Kreps
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

2016-10-06 Thread Ofir Manor
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

2016-10-06 Thread Ben Davison
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

2016-10-04 Thread Edoardo Comar
;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

2016-10-02 Thread Ben Davison
+ 1 to rest client (don't mind if it's the current confluent version or something else) We are a multi language company and the quality of the other clients that are not Java are really hit and miss. A rest endpoint a user could just pump messages into or subscribe to would be amazing. On Sun,

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

2016-10-02 Thread Harsha Chintalapani
Neha & Jay, We did look at the open source alternatives. Our concern is what's the patch acceptance and adding features/ bug-fixes to the existing project under a Github (although it's licensed under Apache 2.0). It would be great if that project made available under Apache and

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

2016-10-01 Thread Neha Narkhede
Manikumar, Thanks for sharing the proposal. I think there are 2 parts to this discussion - 1. Should we rewrite a REST proxy given that there is a feature-complete, open-source and actively maintained REST proxy in the community? 2. Does adding a REST proxy to Apache Kafka make us more agile and

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

2016-10-01 Thread Manikumar
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

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

2016-09-30 Thread Jay Kreps
Hey guys, There's already a REST interface maintained as a separate project--it's open source and apache licensed and actively maintained ( https://github.com/confluentinc/kafka-rest). What is wrong with that? You mentioned that there was some compatibility concern, but compatibility has to do

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

2016-09-29 Thread Harsha Chintalapani
Thanks Mani for the KIP. I'll go over it and add my thoughts on this thread. On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:04 AM Manikumar wrote: > Hi Kafka Devs, > > I created KIP-80 to add Kafka REST Server to Kafka Repository. > > There are already open-source alternatives are