On 04/06/2016 01:20 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote: >> On 04/06/2016 12:32 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote: >>> >>> I wonder if you should include something in release notes. >>> We are fixing the API, so I guess we don't need to follow the deprecation >> process, but at least a note in the documentation? >> >> Good idea, I'll send a v4 with the deprecation notice. > > Well, not sure if this needs a deprecation notice. > I mean, it is an API fix: yes, this is changing what the function returns > in a particular situation (when the hash/lpm already exists) , > but it was going against the API documentation, so a deprecation notice > should not be necessary. > (just my opinion, I could be quite wrong here :P). > > I was thinking more on adding a note in Resolved issues.
Yes, agree, it's a bug fix. Another argument to not follow the API change process is that the initial behavior was to return EEXIST, but it was changed by this commit: http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=916e4f4f4e By the way, the "Fixes:" line was not referencing this commit in the v3, I'll also change that in v4. Thanks, Olivier
