[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2642?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15740163#comment-15740163
 ] 

Andrew Purtell commented on ZOOKEEPER-2642:
-------------------------------------------

bq. although it is a bit odd to deprecate a method in an alpha API.

FWIW as a user I'd think it as notice of a breaking API shipped in 3.5 where it 
will happen in 3.6. This is pretty standard practice. I suppose since 3.5 has 
always been tagged alpha it would not be unreasonable to make breaking changes 
in place in 3.5. However 3.5 has been alpha for a long time, and some have 
given up waiting and resorted to using it in production (!), so as a courtesy 
to them it seems reasonable.

> ZOOKEEPER-2014 breaks existing clients for little benefit
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-2642
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2642
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: c client, java client
>    Affects Versions: 3.5.2
>            Reporter: Jordan Zimmerman
>            Assignee: Jordan Zimmerman
>            Priority: Blocker
>         Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-2642.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2642.patch, 
> ZOOKEEPER-2642.patch
>
>
> ZOOKEEPER-2014 moved the reconfig() methods into a new class, ZooKeeperAdmin. 
> It appears this was done to document that these are methods have access 
> restrictions. However, this change breaks Apache Curator (and possibly other 
> clients). Curator APIs will have to be changed and/or special methods need to 
> be added. A breaking change of this kind should only be done when the benefit 
> is overwhelming. In this case, the same information can be conveyed with 
> documentation and possibly a deprecation notice.
> Revert the creation of the ZooKeeperAdmin class and move the reconfig() 
> methods back to the ZooKeeper class with additional documentation.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to