-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
Docs say defaultRetryTopicKafkaTemplate
is the default template bean name. @RetryableTopic
javadoc says retryTopicDefaultKafkaTemplate
#3514
Comments
That JavaDoc has to be fixed.
So, t definitely uses the mentioned Contribution is welcome! |
Thanks for quickly triaging and providing this information! I may be able to contribute the necessary changes this weekend or next week... we'll see. Hopefully. |
@ndwhelan Are you still planning to contribute these changes? Thanks! |
Hello, |
Thanks for taking this! I hadn't been able to get to it. I'm outside the org here, though, and can't merge. |
In what version(s) of Spring for Apache Kafka are you seeing this issue?
Between (at least) 2.9.13 and 3.2.4
Describe the bug
The documentation states that the default
KafkaTemplate
bean for publishing retries / DLT through@RetryableTopic
isdefaultRetryTopicKafkaTemplate
. The annotation states, and at least some tests use this, that it should beretryTopicDefaultKafkaTemplate
. On the other hand, some tests and code refer todefaultRetryTopicKafkaTemplate
throughRetryTopicBeanNames.DEFAULT_KAFKA_TEMPLATE_BEAN_NAME
I don't know which one to use at this point. Though I'm working around this by specifying a specific values for the
kafkaTemplate
parameter on the@RetryableTopic
annotation.To Reproduce
@RetryableTopic
retryTopicDefaultKafkaTemplate
@RetryableTopic
publishing.To be honest, I'm having trouble determining which bean its using.
Expected behavior
I would expect consistency in the javadoc and the docs on the Spring Kafka website to be consistent. At this point, I don't know which one is actually used in the code.
Sample
If necessary, I will work on an isolated example in a new GitHub repository. Though, i'm hoping this issue/concern is straightforward enough, with the links above, that it's not necessary. Still, I understand if it is.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: