On 12/6/17 12:17 PM, Keith Turner wrote:
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote:
Maybe a difference in interpretation:
I was seeing 1a as being source-compatible still. My assumption was that
"Deprecate ClientConfiguration" meant that it would remain in the codebase
-- "replace" as in "replace expected user invocation", not removal of the
old ClientConfiguration and addition of a new ClientConfig class.
Ok, if we deprecate ClientConfiguration, leave it in 2.0, and drop the
extends from ClientConfiguration in 2.0. Then I am not sure what the
benefit of introducing the new ClientConfig type is?
I read this as leaving the extends in ClientConfiguration and dropping
that in the new ClientConfig. Agree, I wouldn't see the point in
changing the parent class of ClientConfiguration (as that would break
things).
