On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On Feb 8, 2013, at 3:42 PM, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote:
By the way, if we agree on @unstable, I also think having another annotation for marking stable API that are not considered to be stable SPI. Why not something like @onlyAPI or @unstableSPI on an interface ?
I think first we need to define what is an SPI and what is an API first. ATM I don't think I understand clearly the difference in the context of XWiki. Is it clear for you?
I do not really understand your question. The general definition is rather clear: "Service Provider Interface (SPI) is an API intended to be implemented or extended by a third party". What I would like to be annotated is API that we do not consider stable SPI at the moment. It is less restrictive than @unstable, but more than not saying anything. Is that answering your question ?
Thanks -Vincent
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]>wrote:
Yes it's more clear than "beta".
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote:
+1, but I have the impression that @unstable would be more meaningful
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]>wrote:
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Paul,
On Feb 8, 2013, at 1:22 PM, Paul Libbrecht <[email protected]> wrote:
> Doesn't the @deprecated annotation actually does exactly the job? > (except it has to be interpreted as meaning something else than "old code", but "do not use code").
@Deprecated means something different. It's about some code that you shouldn't use because we no longer think it's good to use and it's going to be removed in the future.
This is not what a @beta or @experimental annotation would mean. They would mean "this is a new api that you can use but it's not stable yet and may change in the future so be prepared to update your code if that happens".
Plus @deprecated is technically pretty stable API while @beta can be broken anytime.
Thanks -Vincent
> paul > > > On 8 févr. 2013, at 12:45, Thomas Mortagne wrote: > >>> * Proposal 1 (internal package): >>> - Vincent >>> - Marius >>> >>> * Proposal 2 (experimental package) >>> - Caleb >>> >>> * Proposal 3 (@Beta/@Experimental annotation) >>> - Thomas >>> - Edy >>> >>> * Other proposal >>> - Denis (use 1) for small changes and only use RN to mark new
module as experimental)
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO