Skip to content
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

Remove old Simple clients #1193

Closed
jeffwidman opened this issue Aug 30, 2017 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1196
Closed

Remove old Simple clients #1193

jeffwidman opened this issue Aug 30, 2017 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1196
Milestone

Comments

@jeffwidman
Copy link
Collaborator

jeffwidman commented Aug 30, 2017

I'd like to propose removing all the old SimpleClient/Consumer/Producer code.

My rationale is that whenever I open this codebase to debug or work on something, it requires excessive mental overhead to keep in my head which files are relevant and which are for the old stack. Similarly, when I'm checking whether a test exists for a certain scenario, I have to further doublecheck whether the test is running using the old SimpleClient or the new KafkaClient. Several times I popped this library open to look at what it'd take to achieve #948 and gave up in frustration at the mess of trying to track what needs to be changed and what I can't touch for fear of breaking the old clients.

Since the old SimpleClients are deprecated and frankly not really maintained, we lose little by removing them.

The major effect would be felt by anyone running mixed-mode but can't run two version of this library, either because they've got a monolith or they've migrated consumer but not yet producer, or because they ship a single virtualenv to all microservices (my day job currently does this, and while it saved a lot of time initially, it's now causing quite a bit of pain.) At my day job we are actually not yet fully migrated to the new KafkaClients, so we'd be stuck on the old version for another couple of releases, but I still think it's worth starting to do this.

This is obviously a major breaking change, so would be part of a 2.0 release.

@dpkp / @tvoinarovskyi what do you think?

@dpkp
Copy link
Owner

dpkp commented Aug 30, 2017 via email

@tvoinarovskyi
Copy link
Collaborator

tvoinarovskyi commented Aug 30, 2017

Sure, we can make 2.0 without it ). And leave 1.X branch in case some fixes to old code needs to be done.

@dpkp
Copy link
Owner

dpkp commented Oct 22, 2017

See however #633

@jeffwidman
Copy link
Collaborator Author

#935 would partially solve #633, that's probably the main blocker to doing this.

@jeffwidman jeffwidman added this to the 2.0 milestone Nov 19, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants