It's not about style, there were a number of concerns addressed in that patch. We didn't take the change lightly, we've been discussing it over jira and the mailing list over the past two years.
I think people understand what alpha means. There may be some short term impact for a few, but a significant benefit over the long term. Patrick On Dec 7, 2016 9:24 AM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <[email protected]> wrote: > I read through the issue and disagree about the decision to move the APIs > out. That was a stylistic choice that breaks client code. I realize that > 3.5.x has been advertised as an alpha but you must realize that most of the > world is using it in production. These APIs have now been published. This > will create a real headache for Curator which is why I’ve created > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2642 < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2642> - I hope we can > move these APIs back into ZooKeeper.java. > > -Jordan > > > On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:54 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It's discussed in more depth in the JIRA iirc, but basically; > > ZooKeeper.java provides client APIs, reconfig is an admiistrative API. > > > > Patrick > > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > [email protected] > >> wrote: > > > >> I understand the need to make the methods require proper auth but > there's > >> no reason to move it to a different class that I can see. Am I missing > >> something? > >> > >> ==================== > >> Jordan Zimmerman > >> > >>> On Dec 7, 2016, at 4:37 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> This problem has been a long standing blocker issue for 3.5 and > >> identified > >>> early on as something that would need to change. This has been one of > the > >>> reasons why 3.5 has stayed in alpha - because we allow non-backward > >>> compatible changes to new APIs in alpha and we knew we would have to > fix > >>> this. The description/comments of ZOOKEEPER-2014 does a good job > >>> documenting why this had to change. > >>> > >>> Patrick > >>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > >> [email protected] > >>>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> OK - I found the offending issue: ZOOKEEPER-2014 > >>>> > >>>> What is the benefit/logic of moving the reconfig() variants into a new > >>>> class? I can see if this was done from the start but you have now > broken > >>>> Curator in a fairly serious non-backward compatible way for a minor > >>>> documenting benefit. Does anyone object to me reversing this? > >>>> > >>>> -Jordan > >>>> > >>>>> On Dec 7, 2016, at 11:37 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> I was compiling Curator against the ZK master and noticed that the > >>>> reconfig APIs are gone/changed. Can anyone point me at the issues for > >> this > >>>> and/or the discussion why this breaking change was made? > >>>>> > >>>>> -Jordan > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >
