Agreed on both the icon being preferable as the vehicle to show this for processors on the graph instead of color and also in emphasizing this during processor selection.
Thanks On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Matt Burgess <[email protected]> wrote: > Visual indication on existing processors is a good thing, but IMO we'll > definitely need indication on the processor selection dialog, so the user > will know that we suggest they choose an alternative. > > Regards, > Matt > >> On Apr 30, 2017, at 7:12 PM, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I think an icon on the processor would be best to denote an upcoming >> deprecation. That leaves all colors available to the flow design, since >> any color may have specific meaning to any current flow out there. >> >>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 3:58 PM Juan Sequeiros <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> In same train of though maybe make it default to some color other than >>> white, instinct says red but that might be used to represent an important >>> processor. So suggest maybe default beige? >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 8:20 AM Andy LoPresto <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I'd leave the graphics work/decisions to someone like Rob Moran, but I >>> see >>>> it as similar to the restricted components -- an icon on the processors >>> on >>>> the canvas and the dialog to add components, with additional explanation >>>> (and maybe a target release for full deprecation) in the help notes. >>>> >>>> Andy LoPresto >>>> [email protected] >>>> [email protected] >>>> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 >>>> >>>>> On Apr 29, 2017, at 05:16, Andre <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> dev, >>>>> >>>>> In light of the some recent deprecations (ListenLumberjack) and some >>>>> potential deprecation (PutJMS/GetJMS) I started some progress on how to >>>>> document the depreciation of NiFi components using annotations. >>>>> >>>>> In the absence of any better name I called the annotation >>>>> @DeprecationWarning (so not overlap with Java's @Deprecated) >>>>> >>>>> The suggested modifications are part of PR#1718 and I am keen to hear >>>> your >>>>> thoughts. >>>>> >>>>> While the documentation can be displayed as part of the usage, however >>> I >>>>> would imagine the frequency a user browses to the usage pages will >>> reduce >>>>> as her/him becomes familiar with the components. >>>>> >>>>> In light of this it may be a good idea to use the web UI to highlight >>> a >>>>> processor has been deprecated. >>>>> >>>>> Would anyone suggest a way of doing so without disrupting the user >>>>> experience? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>> >>>
