> > So the alpha > release would have to be tested in a separate environment, with development > warnings enabled, and someone actually looking at the log. Typically, > people > only look at logs after things break. >
Is that true? I thought deprecation warnings appeared directly when viewing a page that used the deprecated code - that was my recent experience of this with the WikiPage/Revision stuff that is deprecated in 1.35 - I was experimenting with an extension (in development mode) that hadn't fixed that issue, and the warnings appeared right there on every page. Arthur On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 6:51 AM Daniel Kinzler <dkinz...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Am 28.08.20 um 17:51 schrieb Arthur Smith: > > Would it be feasible to put the deprecation notices in an early release > > candidate, then encourage third party extension creators to try the > release > > candidate with deprecation notices so they'll see where there are > problems > > in their code, and what they have to do to be ready for the final release > > where deprecated features are removed? > > What you are suggesting sounds like an interesting option to consider - > please > let me know if I understand your idea correctly: > > When code has become obsolete, and we have removed all known usages, we > should > not remove the old code immediately, but we can tag it for removal > *before* the > next release (rather than after, per the current policy). The obsolete > functionality would remain intact (but emitting warnings) in some kind of > alpha-release (even before the "release candidates"). > > Is that what you have in mind? > > What I am wondering is - when people try the alpha release, how would they > even > notice the deprecation warnings? These warnings are disabled per default, > because they would flood the log files on a production site. So the alpha > release would have to be tested in a separate environment, with development > warnings enabled, and someone actually looking at the log. Typically, > people > only look at logs after things break. > > But if the pre-release is tested in a development environment, what's the > advantage of a deprecation warning over a hard error? The only difference > I see > is the reported log level and type of exception. I'm not sure that's > worth the > effort. > > The same question also arises for the existing long deprecation period. My > impression is that the people who should benefit from the long deprecation > either notice right away and quickly fix their code (so they don't need > the long > deprecation), or they don't notice until things break (so they don't need > the > long deprecation either). > > -- > Daniel Kinzler > Principal Software Engineer, Core Platform > Wikimedia Foundation > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
