On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Francesco Romani <[email protected]> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Nir Soffer" <[email protected]> >> To: "Francesco Romani" <[email protected]> >> Cc: "devel" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 6:00:56 PM >> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [vdsm] new internal stable modules + proposal > [...] >> > Lastly, i have a proposal about better handling of those modules. >> > >> > First, the mere fact a module is placed under lib/vdsm/common provides the >> > extra guarantees I mentioned. >> > But should we added more annotations? >> > >> > for example something like >> > >> > __API__ = {} >> > >> > near the top of the module >> > >> > if this attribute exist, then the module is safe to use across verticals, >> > has stable API and so forth >> > (this is _in addition_ to the common/ package, not as replacement). >> > >> > Like: >> > >> > __API__ = { >> > "introduced-in": "4.14.0", >> > "deprecated-from": "4.18.0", >> > "removed-at": "4.20.0", >> > "contact": "[email protected]" >> > } >> >> Since this is internal api, I don't think we need this info. The >> guarantee you have when you >> use such module is that it will never break your code. If someone one >> is changing such module, >> it must change and test the code using it. >> >> Maybe the "standard" __author__ ? > > Yes, maybe just __author__ , __deprecated__ and perhaps __status__. > > I think __deprecated__ would be fit for the task.
Do we have deprecated internal modules? > > (take from e.g. > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1523427/what-is-the-common-header-format-of-python-files > ) > > -- > Francesco Romani > RedHat Engineering Virtualization R & D > Phone: 8261328 > IRC: fromani > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
