removing v1 completely on 10.0 should depend on how soon 10.0 is happening.
are we prepared to do it within a year?

On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 9:47 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm not against a more aggressive plan, i.e. remove v1 in 10.0 - users
> will just have to stay longer on 9.x if they don't want to change their
> apps.
> My only worry there is that the Solr 10.0 release MAY happen already in
> Q2/Q3 2023, and that leaves just a few months preparation time for the
> entire ecosystem to change (other language clients, crawlers, Blacklight
> etc).
>
> Let's hear other voices on this too.
>
> Jan
>
> > 7. nov. 2022 kl. 13:41 skrev Jason Gerlowski <[email protected]>:
> >
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > I guess I'd be a bit uncomfortable with deprecating v1 until v2 has
> > had some decent dog-fooding.  That's probably why the SIP suggests
> > that deprecation coincide with "v2-used-internally": because the
> > earlier "v2-complete" doesn't mean that anything even uses the v2 API
> > yet.  But that's just my two cents: if there's consensus that we have
> > enough confidence in v2, or that it'd be valuable to get the
> > deprecation warning out there earlier, then I can live with that.
> >
> > On your second point, I'm a little leery of tying "v2-complete",
> > "v2-used-internally", and "eventual removal" to any particular
> > releases - mostly because the timing around our releases has been
> > somewhat unpredictable.  I certainly agree that v1 removal has to
> > happen on a major-version boundary, and if 10.0 comes around quickly,
> > then the timeline you suggest seems pretty plausible. But 10.0 might
> > take much longer (9.0 took 3 years after all), in which case it seems
> > reasonable to me that v1 could be removed for 10.0 if all the
> > prerequisites happen early enough in the 9.x line.  I guess I'm
> > worried about a scenario where both 10.x and 11.x are long release
> > lines, and we end up supporting v1 forever.  Any thoughts on that?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 3:04 PM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Both.
> >>
> >> 9x: v2 complete, deprecate v1 (and adding some deprecation noise to
> logs)
> >> 10.0 Switch to using v2 internally
> >> 11.0 Remove v1
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>> 4. nov. 2022 kl. 16:25 skrev Jason Gerlowski <[email protected]>:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Jan,
> >>>
> >>> Just trying to make sure I understand your suggestion.  Are you
> suggesting:
> >>>
> >>> (1) that we announce v1 as deprecated at "V2-API-Complete" (instead of
> >>> the later "v2-API-used-internally")? Or...
> >>> (2) that we plan "v2-API-used-internally" to coincide with 10.0?
> >>> (3) Or both?
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>>
> >>> Jason
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 5:04 PM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for a thorough SIP.
> >>>>
> >>>> Wrt deprecation plan, could we not have "v2-API-Complete" in e.g. 9.5
> (and deprecate v1). Then we wait until 10.0 with "v2-API-used-internally",
> and 11.0 for removing v1. Say we release 10.0 in March 2023, then the new
> main will be 11.0 and we can already remove v1 in main.
> >>>>
> >>>> Looking forward to code generating SolrJ classes. And perhaps
> community members actively using some other prog.language will be empowered
> to auto generate 90% of such clients.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>>> 31. okt. 2022 kl. 21:23 skrev Jason Gerlowski <[email protected]
> >:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hey all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This morning I published SIP-16, which proposes the changes necessary
> >>>>> to "finish" (i.e. plug coverage gaps and polish) Solr's v2 APIs and a
> >>>>> path to deprecating Solr's v1 APIs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The SIP can be found here:
> >>>>>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/SIP-16%3A+Polish+and+Prepare+v2+APIs+for+v1+Deprecation
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please read the SIP description and come back here for discussion.
> As
> >>>>> the discussion progresses we will update the SIP page with any
> >>>>> outcomes and eventually move things to a VOTE (or lazy consensus).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Looking forward to hearing your feedback!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jason
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------
Noble Paul

Reply via email to