On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Filippo Fadda <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jul 22, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Alexander Shorin wrote: >> Experimental features should be enabled in >> configs so user takes responsibility for any behavior it provides. > > I don't agree because when a feature is not experimental anymore you have to > remove it from the "experimental list" and that can introduce new bugs. We > are talking about APIs included by default; these APIs are there, but no one > is telling you to call them. If you do, the special header field > "X-Couch-Experimental" is there to inform that you have called an > experimental API, that normally you are not gonna call. It's just a warning, > that's all. IMHO.
If uncommenting config options introduces new bugs, so removing him from experimental list was a mistake, tests are bad and this should be fixed as soon as possible (: I'm in doubt about X-Couch-Experimental header. If for X-Couch-Deprecated client library __may__ raise some warning about "hey, resource you're requested is deprecated! alarm! alarm!", what the reaction should be for X-Couch-Experimental? There couldn't be any warnings, because I'm explicitly calls some resource - so I'm aware about it existence, know how it works and docs have to aware me about experimental status. Otherwise it makes no sense. -- ,,,^..^,,,
