Chesnay, I think as Gabor said, we have removed modules and functionality in the past which basically made some old configuration keys useless (effectively removed). In this particular case we don't need to remove the static constants that store this config key, we can simply ignore them. This would leave some legacy garbage there but would not break the japicmp plugin.
In any case I think dropping support for this legacy config key makes sense (even if it remains in the code if we insist on it). Gyula On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 1:05 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > d) The japicmp plugin is about programmatic API compatibility, which > doesn't cover Mesos support. > > On 16/06/2022 12:59, Gabor Somogyi wrote: > > OK, I see your point. > > > > Just a question here. Mesos is deprecated in 1.13 here: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-22352 > > and now I don't see any Mesos related classes in 1.16-SNAPSHOT. > > > > No matter from which angle I take a look at it this is breaking change. > > What makes the 2 cases different? > > > > G > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 12:49 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> The japicm-plugin did exactly what it was supposed to be doing. > >> > >> We can't remove these fields because they are part of a @Public class > >> and hence have to remain until Flink 2.0. > >> > >> Adding an exclusion for @Deprecated is a bad idea because it makes it > >> way to easy to break the API. > >> > >> On 16/06/2022 12:43, Gabor Somogyi wrote: > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> I've just tried to delete long time deprecated configs and faced some > >>> inconveniences. > >>> My main intention is to understand what was the idea > >>> when japicmp-maven-plugin introduced related configs/functions marked > >>> with @Deprecated annotation. > >>> > >>> When I've removed the mentioned configs from source code then > >>> japicmp-maven-plugin made the build failed and complained that the > params > >>> are removed which makes sense. > >>> > >>> I've added @Deprecated annotation to excludes which made the original > >> error > >>> disappear but new ones shown because with that exclude all new version > >>> annotated configs/functions are missing. > >>> This makes this solution dead end. > >>> > >>> The only solution I've found is to add the specific configs to the > >> exclude > >>> list. It works like charm but adding all the upcoming removed > deprecated > >>> configs/functions to the exclude list will end-up in a constantly > growing > >>> exclude list. > >>> > >>> Just to give a concrete example: > >> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/19986 > >>> Is there another way which I've missed or this is going to be hot issue > >>> later on? > >>> > >>> Thanks in advance! > >>> > >>> BR, > >>> G > >>> > >> > >
