-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.8k
MINOR: Bump LATEST_PRODUCTION to 4.2-IV1 in 4.2 branch #20972
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ def get_version(node=None): | |
|
|
||
| LATEST_STABLE_TRANSACTION_VERSION = 2 | ||
| # This should match the LATEST_PRODUCTION version defined in MetadataVersion.java | ||
| LATEST_STABLE_METADATA_VERSION = "4.1-IV1" | ||
| LATEST_STABLE_METADATA_VERSION = "4.2-IV1" | ||
|
|
||
| # 2.1.x versions | ||
| V_2_1_0 = KafkaVersion("2.1.0") | ||
|
|
@@ -248,4 +248,5 @@ def get_version(node=None): | |
|
|
||
| # 4.2.x version | ||
| V_4_2_0 = KafkaVersion("4.2.0") | ||
| LATEST_4_2 = V_4_2_0 | ||
| V_4_2_1 = KafkaVersion("4.2.1") | ||
| LATEST_4_2 = V_4_2_1 | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I don't think we need this change yet? As a matter of fact, not even sure why the whole section for 4.2 already exists? We only add released versions here (and 4.2.0 is not release yet, and should only be added in
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This code was added by #20471 to prevent the use of new configurations in order kafka tools, we could remove the entire 4.2 section by reversing the version check condition.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I see. Thanks for clarifying. Guess, for Bottom line: I understand why we needed to add
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I realise now that I was getting confused between Kafka versions and metadata versions. |
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhasp we could add
IBP_4_3_IV0to align the code with other 4.x branches? This would also make the patch easier to cherry-pick to trunkThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, I did consider this, but there's no need for
IBP_4_3_IV0because there are no unstable features.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This sounds like it ought to be part of the release process :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've made a PR against trunk #20977. Let me know if you prefer that cherry-picked into 4.2.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I prefer #20977 because it helps to avoid the awkward
disabledtag 😃There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll fix the comments on that one then and will cherry-pick when it's ready.