Similar to Ekaterina and Brandon, I agree with adding to nodetool. We should ideally keep as much logic in the MBean and out of nodetool so nodetool is a thin layer — which makes it low effort to maintain.
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 06:39 Ekaterina Dimitrova <e.dimitr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is it OK for the community if we added nodetool get/set guardrailsconfig > commands to 4.1, 5.0 and trunk? Then, under (4), the CQL approach would be > delivered as well. > > > This seems non-controversial and the only reason it was not done before > release (to the best of my knowledge) is the hope that updating through > vrables will be done. Also, I agree with all points made around transition > time on the ticket. > > I support the addition of those nodetool get/set commands. 4.1 and 5.0 > will still be around for some time. > > Best regards, > Ekaterina > > On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 at 7:23, Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 6:20 AM Štefan Miklošovič >> <smikloso...@apache.org> wrote: >> > Is it OK for the community if we added nodetool get/set >> guardrailsconfig commands to 4.1, 5.0 and trunk? Then, under (4), the CQL >> approach would be delivered as well. >> >> I am struggling to find a scenario where it wouldn't be ok to add >> useful commands to nodetool. >> >> Kind Regards, >> Brandon >> >
