A) Why? B) I am not really a fan of this. I’d prefer to leave this major of a change for 3.0 unless there is a very compelling reason to do it sooner. I’d prefer to focus on getting 3.0 out sooner.
Ralph > On Apr 16, 2022, at 7:14 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey all, I’m considering porting the new DI system back to 2.x (but put all > in core as there’s no plugins module there) as there seems to be interest in > using this earlier than in 3.0. While I’d be willing to do this, I wanted to > see what anyone else thinks about the idea. I’d likely begin on a branch or > fork, so it’d be nice to get another 2.17.x release out before I merged > anything about this. > > Only real disadvantage of doing this is that the packages move around a > little in 3.x, so I’ll have to add more duplicate annotations in 3.x > afterwards to maintain compatibility. Although maybe I can start using the > plugins package inside core in 2.x so it’s the same package name as in 3.x. > > — > Matt Sicker
