On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:03 PM, vinc...@massol.net <vinc...@massol.net>wrote:
> > > > > On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:14:41, vinc...@massol.net (vinc...@massol.net(mailto: > vinc...@massol.net)) wrote: > > > Note: be careful that you might have added new APIs in a class already > having an @Unstable annotation at the class level and thus when you remove > that class level annotation you might have to add new @Unstable annotations > at the method level if those methods were added/modified in 5.x or later. > > > Actually this is not correct! > > The @Unstable marks the first time an API is introduced. All API changes > that happen after are stabilization of the first version of the API and > this what counts is the first time the API was introduced and after 1 full > cycle, we need to remove the @Unstable annotation. > > For example: > - Git module API was first introduced in 4.2M1 (@Unstable was thus added > at the time) > - Then in 5.3M1 the package was modified > - And in 5.3M2 3 new methods were added > > Consequence: in 6.0 we now consider the Git module API as stable since > it’s been more than 1 full cycle since it was first introduced. This means > that from now on, if we wish to modify this API we need to ensure we don’t > break the backward compatibility or we’ll need to send a VOTE if we want to > break it and explain why we wish to break it and why there’s no other > solution, to try to convince the other committers. > While I agree with your point, I do not see why we could not add new methods, or keep some recent methods with an @unstable flag. Adding new method does not necessarily break an API IMO. > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > Thanks > > -Vincent > > > > On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:11:04, vinc...@massol.net (vinc...@massol.net > (mailto:vinc...@massol.net)) wrote: > > > > > ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable > annotations to remove: > > > > > > * commons-job module. Owner: Thomas > > > * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent > > > * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent > > > * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas > > > * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, > SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius > > > * platform-url. Owner: Vincent > > > > > > Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found > inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before > 5.0M1? > > > > > > Thanks > > > -Vincent > > > > > > On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne (thomas.morta...@xwiki.com > (mailto:thomas.morta...@xwiki.com)) wrote: > > > > > > > It's not a threat :) > > > > > > > > It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API > > > > is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation > > > > did not exist in 3.x). > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > > > > > Vincent, > > > > > is there a clickable list? > > > > > A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to > xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened? > > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > > > paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "vinc...@massol.net" a écrit : > > > > >> According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need > to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been > there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle). > > > > >> > > > > >> See > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40UnstableAnnotation > > > > >> > > > > >> It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can > consider stable now. > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > devs@xwiki.org > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
