Doesn't deprecation mean the code will be there for a while and therefore the new code will not break existing user code?
How long will deprecated code stay around in Tuscany? It would be good to establish a guideline so users can plan to move to the new code. Can there be a log of deprecated APIs under documentation page or download page? This will help users to better plan for moving code to the new APIs/SPIs. On 8/21/08, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think we should do this yet. We've only just put Node2 out in a > release and users have just started to move from the SCADomain APIs to it so > to turn around an immediately deprecate it doesn't give a very good user > experience, and one of our users has even replied to this thread saying > that. > > And I don't think we should deprecate it till we know what the final stable > API is and I don't think we know Node2 is it yet. Its not great you need to > cast to the SCAClient so thats one thing that could be improved, there's the > various spec group proposals going on for the client APIs that will be > resolved at some point which we'll need to make updates for, I've got a work > item i need to do in the next couple of months on the client APIs and that > will likely require changes. Just yesterday there was the new proposal for > how our samples should be using the SCA programming model. All that to me > says we should wait a bit for things to settle down before making breaking > changes or deprecating anything, is there any real need to rush this in? > > ...ant > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> OK. Instead of renaming, I'll add SCANodeFactory/SCANode and leave the >> SCANode2Factory/SCANode2 deprecated. Existing samples or itests will be >> migrated to use SCANodeFactory/SCANode. Meanwhile I'll change the maven >> artifact ids from node2-xxx to node-xxx. >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> >> From: ant elder >> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:17 AM >> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk >> >> >> I agree with Dave and think we should leave this to try for a while before >> settling on it as a long term final api. >> >> ...ant >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Thank you for sharing your thought. Which set of Tuscany APIs are you >> using? SCADomain or SCANode2? >> >> I agree that we have to be extra careful to maintain the compatibility for >> APIs. But we also have to bite the bullet sometimes as the project evolves, >> otherwise it will create even more compatibility issues and confusions over >> time. Unfortunately we have been in this half-compatibility mode for a while >> and that's probably why it becomes difficult to follow as we give the users >> too many choices :-(. Worth to point out is that I proposed this change for >> the trunk instead of 1.3.x branches. >> >> If most of the users still use the SCADomain (due to the fact that most of >> our samples are using SCADomain without deprecation), it's probably better >> to rename the SCANode2 sooner than later before it gets popular :-). YMMV. >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Dave Sowerby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:10 AM >> To: <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk >> >> >> >> Hi Guys, >> >> I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found >> it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also >> that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and >> then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Dave. >> >> -- >> Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS >> >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >> Hi, >> >> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as >> SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I >> propose that we rename them back to Node/node. >> >> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week. >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> >> >> We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were the >> new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think >> we >> need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it >> will >> break users code. >> >> ...ant >> >> > >
