Hi Stanislav, The api is marked as “Production” so the behavior of checkstyle is there to protect the users (as for the duplication - it is a choice to do it once in VPP or in each and every downstream consumer). As for the pure code exercise - I just did it for the sake of a test, took a grand total of 15 minutes to add the new message versions. Hardly a massive deal. (We could probably improve tooling on the lifecycle management of these, though)
That said - for this specific case - is the presence of the “namespace” member in a structure within the api a showstopper for you - that is, does it cause a compilation failure of some sort ? If so - one option is to mark the APIs as experimental and then change it in-place. It is up to component owners to decide the policy. --a > On 15 Jul 2022, at 09:39, Stanislav Zaikin <zsta...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello folks, > > According to [0] it should be possible to add breaking changes to vpp api > with incrementing the major version of the api. There's one issue in the LCP > api - a C++ keyword "namespace" is used there and I want to change it to > "netns" and increase a major version. But make checkstyle-api still fails. > Any ideas? > > Of course, I can add new methods _v2 and deprecate the older ones. But it'd > lead to code duplication and still I'd need to wait at least 2 releases. > > [0] https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP/API_Versioning > > -- > Best regards > Stanislav Zaikin > > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#21664): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/21664 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/92396431/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/leave/1480452/21656/631435203/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
