Thinking more on that.. What's the correlation between Public/Private annotations and Deprecated annotation? I'm not sure SemVer has notion of deprecation of non-public API. Should we say that we don't have it too, or we do, but deprecation cycle of such API is more aggressive than for public?
-Mikhail On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected]> wrote: > In branch-1.0 HTable is {Private, Stable} with comment - > > * <p>HTable is no longer a client API. Use {@link Table} instead. It is marked > * InterfaceAudience.Private indicating that this is an HBase-internal > class as defined in > * <a > href="https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/current/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/InterfaceClassification.html";>Hadoop > * Interface Classification</a> > * There are no guarantees for backwards source / binary compatibility > and methods or class can > * change or go away without deprecation. > > So I think it's OK to remove such methods in 2.0. Otherwise, IMO, > having to go thru full major version of deprecation kind of makes > Private audience annotation meaningless? > > semver.org says: > > "Software using Semantic Versioning MUST declare a public API. This > API could be declared in the code itself or exist strictly in > documentation. However it is done, it should be precise and > comprehensive. > > ..<skipped> > > Version 1.0.0 defines the public API. The way in which the version > number is incremented after this release is dependent on this public > API and how it changes." > > > -Mikhail > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: >> For a given major version, we should make sure to keep at least the promise >> we made when it started. >> >> For HBase 1.y, we said at 1.0 that we wouldn't remove public API without >> having a full major version of deprecation. If only for that reason I agree >> wholeheartedly on the principle. >> >> But I thought HTable wasn't public API as of the 1.0 release. Is that not >> correct? >> >> -- >> Sean >> On Jun 26, 2015 12:59 PM, "Stack" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> (Intent is that this is a long-lived thread where we work out our >>> transition to semantic versioning). >>> >>> In HBASE-13214 "Remove deprecated and unused methods from HTable class", >>> Ashish Singhi is doing nice cleanup work. His patch is removing deprecated >>> methods from HTable for hbase-2.0.0. A few methods up for removal are >>> deprecated in hbase-1.1.0 but not in hbase-1.0.0. Ashish quotes Semantic >>> Versioning: >>> >>> "...issue a new minor release with the deprecation in place. Before you >>> completely remove the functionality in a new major release there should be >>> at least one minor release that contains the deprecation so that users can >>> smoothly transition to the new API." >>> >>> So, Ashish's patch is well within what SV allows but to my mind we need to >>> be even more conservative if only during this period of transition to SV. I >>> think we should not remove deprecated methods, especially high-profile >>> client-facing ones, until a major version has elapsed with the method >>> deprecated. >>> >>> Opinions? >>> Thanks, >>> St.Ack >>> > > > > -- > Thanks, > Michael Antonov -- Thanks, Michael Antonov
