> On Jan. 9, 2015, 6:44 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
> > docs/thrift-deprecation.md, line 31
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29117/diff/2/?file=793344#file793344line31>
> >
> >     There should be an item about logging and signaling in API responses 
> > when deprecated fields are used.
> 
> Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
>     We have not done this before and there is no standard way to accomplish 
> it across our codebases. Should it rather be done at the feature level rather 
> than the thrift schema level?

I've definitely pushed for server-side logging in the scheduler, client-side 
logging, and i definitely think the API should include a `ResponseDetail` entry 
when a deprecated feature is used in a request.


> On Jan. 9, 2015, 6:44 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
> > docs/thrift-deprecation.md, line 3
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29117/diff/2/?file=793344#file793344line3>
> >
> >     First suggestion should be to go read this page: 
> > http://diwakergupta.github.io/thrift-missing-guide/
> >     
> >     The page doesn't call out schema evolution, but fills in a bunch of 
> > other context.
> 
> Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
>     I had it initially but decided to leave it out to avoid possible 
> confusion. Glad to add it back if you feel it will be useful.

I see little harm - so i think it should be here.


> On Jan. 9, 2015, 6:44 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
> > docs/thrift-deprecation.md, line 16
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29117/diff/2/?file=793344#file793344line16>
> >
> >     I have mixed feelings about this.  It's fine on the wire _for specific 
> > thrift encodings_.  This would, for example, break /apibeta.
> 
> Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
>     Do you mean backwards compatibility with he old way of consuming /apibeta 
> output? I don't think we are at the position to fully support /apibeta 
> compatibilty and given its rather experimental status we most likely would 
> not do it anyway.

I dunno, i think it's something we should not take so lightly as to encourage 
casual renames.  It's a practice we need to begin stepping up anyhow as we 
prepare to introduce a non-thrift API.


- Bill


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29117/#review67471
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 21, 2015, 10:59 p.m., Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/29117/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 21, 2015, 10:59 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney and Bill Farner.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AURORA-973
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-973
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This is a first stab at documenting thrift deprecation. Any 
> suggestions/comments are welcome.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   docs/developing-aurora-client.md b9912bce44d65ddd7f1e35f0ea9356a89d5fe767 
>   docs/developing-aurora-scheduler.md 
> 7f6cc2e6c8e01115a9b7a7dc7633bcd88ba02a0f 
>   docs/thrift-deprecation.md PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/29117/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> https://github.com/maxim111333/incubator-aurora/blob/populated_deprecation/docs/thrift-deprecation.md
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Maxim Khutornenko
> 
>

Reply via email to