On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wednesday, November 23, 2011 7:30:17 PM Timothy Ward wrote:
> > I see this commit as, at best, a stop-gap measure.
>
> Agreed.   But we need a migration path for users of these API's that
> doesn't
> break everything right now.
>
> > We should not be
> > exporting these implementation packages, but I understand that they are
> > relied upon externally (for the moment) until we have enough API pieces
> to
> > get everyone migrated off. I would like the blueprint container, di and
> > reflect packages to add the following:
> >
> > deprecated="true";mandatory:="deprecated"
> >
> > Clients that need them can add the deprecated attribute and continue to
> > work, but we prevent new clients from wiring to packages that are
> intended
> > to be removed. Otherwise we're going to go round the same loop all over
> > again and never be able to package the bundle properly.
>
> I agree with adding deprecated="true"  and will do so shortly.   I don't
> agree
> with the second part *for now*.   That would still prevent existing
> applications from being able to use the new BP without going through
> modifications, rebuilds, new releases, etc....    Basically, I want to get
> a
> version out that doesn't break all the applications out there, but provides
> the new API's and functionality that is needed.   Give the projects time to
> migrate to the new API's (and fully test them), then make it harder (or
> impossible) to use the old API's by adding the second flag.
>
>
> Dan
> Well. If you don't add mandatory:="deprecated", there is little value to
> add the attribute at all as any clients can import the package with
> specifying the attributes.
>
> > This approach could also be used with the cm code until we have an
> > understanding for what API that requires and package it appropriately.
>
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>



-- 
Thanks
Emily
=================
Emily Jiang
[email protected]

Reply via email to