Yes, this is just a PoC. The tool has a "skip deprecated" flag to exclude deprecated methods from the report. Tests can easily be excluded. I've just launched the check against all jars found in the ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/jclouds folder for the analysed versions, so it has picked the "-tests" jars too.
It as also included jars from all labs repos, where we don't care that much about backwards compatibility. Just wanted to share the tool and an example report (which I like), and see if it could be useful to include it as part of the release notes. On 9 March 2016 at 21:54, Andrew Gaul <g...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 01:50:40PM -0500, Andrew Phillips wrote: >> package org.jclouds.azureblob >> [+] AzureBlobClient.copyBlob ( URI p1, String p2, String p3, >> CopyBlobOptions p4 ) [abstract] : void (1) > > I changed this method to return the ETag from the response. It is not > binary compatible but is source compatible with previous releases. > >> package org.jclouds.blobstore.options >> CopyOptions.Builder.contentMetadata ( ContentMetadata >> contentMetadata ) : CopyOptions.Builder (1) >> CopyOptions.Builder.userMetadata ( Map<String,String> userMetadata ) >> : CopyOptions.Builder (1) > > These method break source compatibility but CopyOptions has a @Beta > annotation. > >> Are these actually "real" problems, or false positives? > > This report has a lot of noise due to tests. Can we exclude these? > Many of the removal warnings have proper deprecation tags although > others like CloudFilesBlobStore were deprecated via informal means. > > -- > Andrew Gaul > http://gaul.org/
