MINOR: Add JmxTool wrapper scripts and redirection (KIP-906)#13195
MINOR: Add JmxTool wrapper scripts and redirection (KIP-906)#13195mimaison merged 5 commits intoapache:trunkfrom
Conversation
99971d8 to
d6f3d3e
Compare
|
Was a KIP submitted for this? Generally, if something ends up in the release notes due to user impact, it requires a KIP. |
|
I am not aware of any KIP regarding the migration of the tools from core module to tools module. Having a small one for those problematic tools is not a bad idea. For the context, package name of the tools has been changed during the migration. For tools with a script, the change is transparent. For tools without a script, the change will break things. Hence my question in this PR. |
|
@dajac well, that depends on whether it's considered public api. My position is that the only API is the script. If there is no script, it's not public API. How would users even know about the tools if they're not documented? Are the tools in question documented? |
|
Yeah, it is definitely a gray area. I don’t think that those tools are documented in the Kafka documentation. Somehow, JmxTool is known and you can find references to it on Stackoverflow and in articles online. I don’t have a strong opinion on this but thoughts that it is worth having a discussion. Being user friendly is also nice in general. |
|
By the way, there is another case here: #13214. |
|
Thanks David for your suggestion about a KIP, this looks appropriate indeed. And, this can be an opportunity to add documentations for these SPIs, too. |
|
@fvaleri Is the KIP going to include the interface |
Not specifically, I was thinking more about proposing a policy (series of guidelines) to address the common compatibility issues we have seen while kicking off this migration. |
|
@mimaison added the missing wrapper scripts for this tool as specified in KIP-906 and changed the system tests to use it. System test run after latest changes: |
|
Technically KIP-906 was voted after KIP freeze but since some tools have already been migrated I think we should merge PRs that add the redirection and the warning message to avoid breaking things. |
|
@dajac Any objections? |
Signed-off-by: Federico Valeri <fedevaleri@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Federico Valeri <fedevaleri@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Federico Valeri <fedevaleri@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Federico Valeri <fedevaleri@gmail.com>
|
@mimaison No objections. I do agree that we should avoid breaking things. |
Signed-off-by: Federico Valeri <fedevaleri@gmail.com>
Reviewers: Mickael Maison <mickael.maison@gmail.com> , David Jacot <djacot@confluent.io>, Christo Lolov <christololov@gmail.com>, Alexandre Dupriez <alexandre.dupriez@gmail.com>
|
Since the initial JmxTool changes are in 3.5, I've backported this to 3.5 too. |
No description provided.