14 Apr
2012
14 Apr
'12
9:46 a.m.
Hi Paul,
On Apr 13, 2012, at 8:26 PM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Le 13 avr. 2012 à 17:53, Vincent Massol a écrit :
I was expecting a tool that evaluates usages so that going private would have been warned
against.
Good, so there's a software to watchdog backwards compatibility.
So, was clirr not yet available when this commit was made? ("3 years ago").
It was maybe available. But as I mentioned, when we voluntarily break an API we put that
in the release notes. So we may have decided voluntarily to break this API. And honestly
that wasn't a bad choice. In 3 years you're the only person affected which means
it was a pretty good choice to make with very limited breakage ;) JV has decided to put it
back hastily because probably he didn't have the time to spend some time with you to
analyze your need and see how to best answer it. Now it's not a bad choice he just did
since we're going to completely rewrite this plugin as components one day (I hope
that day isn't too far in the future ;)) and the whole AS plugin will be moved to our
legacy modules when it happens. At that point you'll be able to either continue using
the old legacy stuff or move to the new one and you should definitely raise your needs/use
cases before we finish the rewrite… ;)
Thanks
-Vincent
Le 13
avr. 2012 à 17:27, Jean-Vincent Drean a écrit :
It has nothing to do with Curriki. > This appears to have been made at
https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/1837196f0f6434603c4c24a13b7c… as
part of a "code cleanup". Jean-Vincent, or someone else, could you explain the
rationale behind it? I am sure this was checked for "others usages" but Curriki
was not considered as part of that.
> [...] I wonder if such a search engine exists that would have indicated that such a
breakage would have been avoided.
I think clirr is doing this job now.
Could we configure it to consider projects
such as Curriki?