You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@kafka.apache.org by Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> on 2017/12/06 14:54:25 UTC
Re: [VOTE] KIP-210: Provide for custom error handling when Kafka
Streams fails to produce
Bumping this thread so it’s visible given that the conversation on KIP-210
has converged again.
Current tally is 2 binding +1s, and 2 non-binding +1s.
On November 8, 2017 at 12:26:32 PM, Damian Guy (damian.guy@gmail.com) wrote:
+1 (binding)
On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 at 16:50 Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io> wrote:
> Yes. A KIP needs 3 binding "+1" to be accepted.
>
> You can still work on the PR and get it ready to get merged -- I am
> quite confident that this KIP will be accepted :)
>
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 11/4/17 3:56 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> > Bump! I believe I need two more binding +1's to proceed?
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 (binding) from me. Thanks!
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The vote should stay open for at least 72 hours. The bylaws can be
> >> found
> >>>> here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Bylaws
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hello all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It seems like discussion around KIP-210 has gone to a lull. I've
got
> >>> some
> >>>>> candidate work underway for it already, so I'd like to go ahead and
> >> call
> >>>>> it
> >>>>> to a vote.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For reference, the KIP can be found here:
> >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-210+-+
> >>>>>
> Provide+for+custom+error+handling++when+Kafka+Streams+fails+to+produce
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also, how long to vote threads stay open generally before changing
> the
> >>>>> status of the KIP?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> Matt
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> -- Guozhang
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> -- Guozhang
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-210: Provide for custom error handling when Kafka
Streams fails to produce
Posted by Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me>.
Thank you, Gwen! =)
I think that puts us over the finish line. Unless I hear any objections in
the next 12(ish) hours I’ll move the KIP to accepted on the wiki.
On December 12, 2017 at 7:50:23 PM, Gwen Shapira (gwen@confluent.io) wrote:
+1 (binding) - looks awesome.
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:42 AM Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> Current tally here is 2 binding +1s, 4 non-binding +1s.
>
> The remaining remarks on the PR seem to mostly be nits, so I feel like
> we’ve converged a bit. If a committer could take a look and either leave
me
> some feedback on the discussion thread or give me a +1, I’d really
> appreciate it. :)
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> On December 6, 2017 at 2:07:08 PM, Matthias J. Sax (matthias@confluent.io)
> wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
>
> On 12/6/17 7:54 AM, Bill Bejeck wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> >
> >> Bumping this thread so it’s visible given that the conversation on
> KIP-210
> >> has converged again.
> >>
> >> Current tally is 2 binding +1s, and 2 non-binding +1s.
> >>
> >> On November 8, 2017 at 12:26:32 PM, Damian Guy (damian.guy@gmail.com)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >> On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 at 16:50 Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes. A KIP needs 3 binding "+1" to be accepted.
> >>>
> >>> You can still work on the PR and get it ready to get merged -- I am
> >>> quite confident that this KIP will be accepted :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Matthias
> >>>
> >>> On 11/4/17 3:56 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> >>>> Bump! I believe I need two more binding +1's to proceed?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 (binding) from me. Thanks!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The vote should stay open for at least 72 hours. The bylaws can
be
> >>>>> found
> >>>>>>> here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Bylaws
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hello all,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It seems like discussion around KIP-210 has gone to a lull. I've
> >> got
> >>>>>> some
> >>>>>>>> candidate work underway for it already, so I'd like to go ahead
> and
> >>>>> call
> >>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>> to a vote.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For reference, the KIP can be found here:
> >>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-210+-+
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>
Provide+for+custom+error+handling++when+Kafka+Streams+fails+to+produce
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Also, how long to vote threads stay open generally before
changing
> >>> the
> >>>>>>>> status of the KIP?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>> Matt
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> -- Guozhang
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> -- Guozhang
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-210: Provide for custom error handling when Kafka
Streams fails to produce
Posted by Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>.
+1 (binding) - looks awesome.
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:42 AM Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> Current tally here is 2 binding +1s, 4 non-binding +1s.
>
> The remaining remarks on the PR seem to mostly be nits, so I feel like
> we’ve converged a bit. If a committer could take a look and either leave me
> some feedback on the discussion thread or give me a +1, I’d really
> appreciate it. :)
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> On December 6, 2017 at 2:07:08 PM, Matthias J. Sax (matthias@confluent.io)
> wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
>
> On 12/6/17 7:54 AM, Bill Bejeck wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> >
> >> Bumping this thread so it’s visible given that the conversation on
> KIP-210
> >> has converged again.
> >>
> >> Current tally is 2 binding +1s, and 2 non-binding +1s.
> >>
> >> On November 8, 2017 at 12:26:32 PM, Damian Guy (damian.guy@gmail.com)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >> On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 at 16:50 Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes. A KIP needs 3 binding "+1" to be accepted.
> >>>
> >>> You can still work on the PR and get it ready to get merged -- I am
> >>> quite confident that this KIP will be accepted :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Matthias
> >>>
> >>> On 11/4/17 3:56 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> >>>> Bump! I believe I need two more binding +1's to proceed?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 (binding) from me. Thanks!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The vote should stay open for at least 72 hours. The bylaws can be
> >>>>> found
> >>>>>>> here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Bylaws
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hello all,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It seems like discussion around KIP-210 has gone to a lull. I've
> >> got
> >>>>>> some
> >>>>>>>> candidate work underway for it already, so I'd like to go ahead
> and
> >>>>> call
> >>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>> to a vote.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For reference, the KIP can be found here:
> >>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-210+-+
> >>>>>>>>
> >>> Provide+for+custom+error+handling++when+Kafka+Streams+fails+to+produce
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Also, how long to vote threads stay open generally before changing
> >>> the
> >>>>>>>> status of the KIP?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>> Matt
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> -- Guozhang
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> -- Guozhang
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-210: Provide for custom error handling when Kafka
Streams fails to produce
Posted by Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me>.
Current tally here is 2 binding +1s, 4 non-binding +1s.
The remaining remarks on the PR seem to mostly be nits, so I feel like
we’ve converged a bit. If a committer could take a look and either leave me
some feedback on the discussion thread or give me a +1, I’d really
appreciate it. :)
Thanks!
On December 6, 2017 at 2:07:08 PM, Matthias J. Sax (matthias@confluent.io)
wrote:
+1
On 12/6/17 7:54 AM, Bill Bejeck wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
>
>> Bumping this thread so it’s visible given that the conversation on
KIP-210
>> has converged again.
>>
>> Current tally is 2 binding +1s, and 2 non-binding +1s.
>>
>> On November 8, 2017 at 12:26:32 PM, Damian Guy (damian.guy@gmail.com)
>> wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 at 16:50 Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
wrote:
>>
>>> Yes. A KIP needs 3 binding "+1" to be accepted.
>>>
>>> You can still work on the PR and get it ready to get merged -- I am
>>> quite confident that this KIP will be accepted :)
>>>
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>> On 11/4/17 3:56 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
>>>> Bump! I believe I need two more binding +1's to proceed?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 (binding) from me. Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote should stay open for at least 72 hours. The bylaws can be
>>>>> found
>>>>>>> here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Bylaws
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It seems like discussion around KIP-210 has gone to a lull. I've
>> got
>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>> candidate work underway for it already, so I'd like to go ahead
and
>>>>> call
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> to a vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For reference, the KIP can be found here:
>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-210+-+
>>>>>>>>
>>> Provide+for+custom+error+handling++when+Kafka+Streams+fails+to+produce
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, how long to vote threads stay open generally before changing
>>> the
>>>>>>>> status of the KIP?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> -- Guozhang
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> -- Guozhang
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-210: Provide for custom error handling when Kafka
Streams fails to produce
Posted by "Matthias J. Sax" <ma...@confluent.io>.
+1
On 12/6/17 7:54 AM, Bill Bejeck wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
>
>> Bumping this thread so it’s visible given that the conversation on KIP-210
>> has converged again.
>>
>> Current tally is 2 binding +1s, and 2 non-binding +1s.
>>
>> On November 8, 2017 at 12:26:32 PM, Damian Guy (damian.guy@gmail.com)
>> wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 at 16:50 Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes. A KIP needs 3 binding "+1" to be accepted.
>>>
>>> You can still work on the PR and get it ready to get merged -- I am
>>> quite confident that this KIP will be accepted :)
>>>
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>> On 11/4/17 3:56 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
>>>> Bump! I believe I need two more binding +1's to proceed?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 (binding) from me. Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote should stay open for at least 72 hours. The bylaws can be
>>>>> found
>>>>>>> here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Bylaws
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It seems like discussion around KIP-210 has gone to a lull. I've
>> got
>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>> candidate work underway for it already, so I'd like to go ahead and
>>>>> call
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> to a vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For reference, the KIP can be found here:
>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-210+-+
>>>>>>>>
>>> Provide+for+custom+error+handling++when+Kafka+Streams+fails+to+produce
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, how long to vote threads stay open generally before changing
>>> the
>>>>>>>> status of the KIP?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> -- Guozhang
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> -- Guozhang
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-210: Provide for custom error handling when Kafka
Streams fails to produce
Posted by Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> Bumping this thread so it’s visible given that the conversation on KIP-210
> has converged again.
>
> Current tally is 2 binding +1s, and 2 non-binding +1s.
>
> On November 8, 2017 at 12:26:32 PM, Damian Guy (damian.guy@gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 at 16:50 Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> > Yes. A KIP needs 3 binding "+1" to be accepted.
> >
> > You can still work on the PR and get it ready to get merged -- I am
> > quite confident that this KIP will be accepted :)
> >
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> > On 11/4/17 3:56 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> > > Bump! I believe I need two more binding +1's to proceed?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1 (binding) from me. Thanks!
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> The vote should stay open for at least 72 hours. The bylaws can be
> > >> found
> > >>>> here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Bylaws
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matt Farmer <ma...@frmr.me> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hello all,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It seems like discussion around KIP-210 has gone to a lull. I've
> got
> > >>> some
> > >>>>> candidate work underway for it already, so I'd like to go ahead and
> > >> call
> > >>>>> it
> > >>>>> to a vote.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> For reference, the KIP can be found here:
> > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-210+-+
> > >>>>>
> > Provide+for+custom+error+handling++when+Kafka+Streams+fails+to+produce
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Also, how long to vote threads stay open generally before changing
> > the
> > >>>>> status of the KIP?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>> Matt
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> -- Guozhang
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> -- Guozhang
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>