On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:17:16AM -0700, Ansis Atteka wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo > <casca...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 01:22:39PM -0700, Ansis Atteka wrote: > >> It seems that we haven't defined clear process on how features should > >> be removed from OVS. This patch attempts to document this process. > >> > >> Singed-off-by: Ansis Atteka <aatt...@nicira.com> > >> --- > >> CONTRIBUTING.md | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md > >> index 12cb7dc..12d2a77 100644 > >> --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md > >> +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md > >> @@ -24,6 +24,8 @@ In particular: > >> > >> - A patch that adds or removes user-visible features should > >> also update the appropriate user documentation or manpages. > >> + Check "Feature Deprecation Guidelines" section in this document > >> + if you intend to remove user-visible feature. > >> > >> Testing is also important: > >> > >> @@ -263,6 +265,35 @@ certifies the following: > >> maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with > >> this project or the open source license(s) involved. > >> > >> +Feature Deprecation Guidelines > >> +------------------------------ > >> + > >> +Open vSwitch is intended to be user friendly. This means that under > >> +normal circumstances we don't abruptly remove features from OVS that > >> +some users might still be using. Otherwise, if we would, then we would > >> +possibly break our user setup when they upgrade and would receive bug > >> +reports. > >> + > >> +Typical process to deprecate a feature in Open vSwitch is to: > >> + > >> + (a) Mention deprecation of a feature in the NEWS file. Also, mention > >> + expected release or absolute time when this feature would be > >> removed > >> + from OVS altogether. Don't use relative time (e.g. "in 6 months") > >> + because that is not clearly interpretable. > >> + > >> + (b) If Open vSwitch is configured to use deprecated feature it should > >> print > >> + a warning message to the log files clearly indicating that > >> feature is > >> + deprecated and that use of it should be avoided. > >> + > >> + (c) If this feature is mentioned in man pages, then add "Deprecated" > >> keyword > >> + to it. > >> + > >> +Also, if there is alternative feature to the one that is about to be > >> marked > >> +as deprecated, then mention it in (a), (b) and (c) as well. > >> + > >> +Remember to followup and acctually remove the feature from OVS codebase > >> +once deprecation grace period has expired! > >> + > >> Comments > >> -------- > >> > >> -- > >> 2.1.4 > > > > Should it make it clear that deprecation before removal should be part of a > > release? Otherwise, users will not notice the deprecation before the > > feature is > > removed. > > Sorry for late response, I was off last week. If I understand > correctly, then you wanted this document to state more clearly that > "feature deprecation" and "feature removal" must be done in different > releases. I think wording "release after" should help to comprehend > that. So how about following wording: > > "Remember to followup and actually remove the feature from OVS codebase > in one of the next releases after deprecation grace period has expired."
Well, that's about the feature removal. I mean the deprecation itself must be part of a release. For example, the feature should only be removed from 3.1, if the deprecation warning has been part of 3.0. Cascardo. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
