[xwiki-devs] [Reminder] Review and removal of @Unstable annotation for 6.x
Hi guys, According to your rules since we’re starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle). See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab... It’s also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now. Thanks -Vincent
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened? thanks paul Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> a écrit :
According to your rules since we’re starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle).
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
It’s also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
It's not a threat :) It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x). On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht <[email protected]> wrote:
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened?
thanks
paul
Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> a écrit :
According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle).
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable annotations to remove: * commons-job module. Owner: Thomas * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius * platform-url. Owner: Vincent Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before 5.0M1? Thanks -Vincent On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
It's not a threat :)
It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x).
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened?
thanks
paul
Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" a écrit :
According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle).
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
_______________________________________________ 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
Note: be careful that you might have added new APIs in a class already having an @Unstable annotation at the class level and thus when you remove that class level annotation you might have to add new @Unstable annotations at the method level if those methods were added/modified in 5.x or later. Thanks -Vincent On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:11:04, [email protected] ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable annotations to remove:
* commons-job module. Owner: Thomas * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius * platform-url. Owner: Vincent
Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before 5.0M1?
Thanks -Vincent
On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
It's not a threat :)
It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x).
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened?
thanks
paul
Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" a écrit :
According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle).
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
_______________________________________________ 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
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:14:41, [email protected] ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
Note: be careful that you might have added new APIs in a class already having an @Unstable annotation at the class level and thus when you remove that class level annotation you might have to add new @Unstable annotations at the method level if those methods were added/modified in 5.x or later.
Actually this is not correct! The @Unstable marks the first time an API is introduced. All API changes that happen after are stabilization of the first version of the API and this what counts is the first time the API was introduced and after 1 full cycle, we need to remove the @Unstable annotation. For example: - Git module API was first introduced in 4.2M1 (@Unstable was thus added at the time) - Then in 5.3M1 the package was modified - And in 5.3M2 3 new methods were added Consequence: in 6.0 we now consider the Git module API as stable since it’s been more than 1 full cycle since it was first introduced. This means that from now on, if we wish to modify this API we need to ensure we don’t break the backward compatibility or we’ll need to send a VOTE if we want to break it and explain why we wish to break it and why there’s no other solution, to try to convince the other committers. Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:11:04, [email protected] ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable annotations to remove:
* commons-job module. Owner: Thomas * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius * platform-url. Owner: Vincent
Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before 5.0M1?
Thanks -Vincent
On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
It's not a threat :)
It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x).
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened?
thanks
paul
Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" a écrit :
According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle).
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:03 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]>wrote:
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:14:41, [email protected] ([email protected](mailto: [email protected])) wrote:
Note: be careful that you might have added new APIs in a class already having an @Unstable annotation at the class level and thus when you remove that class level annotation you might have to add new @Unstable annotations at the method level if those methods were added/modified in 5.x or later.
Actually this is not correct!
The @Unstable marks the first time an API is introduced. All API changes that happen after are stabilization of the first version of the API and this what counts is the first time the API was introduced and after 1 full cycle, we need to remove the @Unstable annotation.
For example: - Git module API was first introduced in 4.2M1 (@Unstable was thus added at the time) - Then in 5.3M1 the package was modified - And in 5.3M2 3 new methods were added
Consequence: in 6.0 we now consider the Git module API as stable since it’s been more than 1 full cycle since it was first introduced. This means that from now on, if we wish to modify this API we need to ensure we don’t break the backward compatibility or we’ll need to send a VOTE if we want to break it and explain why we wish to break it and why there’s no other solution, to try to convince the other committers.
While I agree with your point, I do not see why we could not add new methods, or keep some recent methods with an @unstable flag. Adding new method does not necessarily break an API IMO.
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:11:04, [email protected] ([email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable annotations to remove:
* commons-job module. Owner: Thomas * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius * platform-url. Owner: Vincent
Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before 5.0M1?
Thanks -Vincent
On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne ([email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
It's not a threat :)
It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x).
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened?
thanks
paul
Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" a écrit :
According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle).
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO
On 10 Feb 2014 at 13:55:09, Denis Gervalle ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:14:41, [email protected] ([email protected](mailto: [email protected])) wrote:
Note: be careful that you might have added new APIs in a class already having an @Unstable annotation at the class level and thus when you remove that class level annotation you might have to add new @Unstable annotations at the method level if those methods were added/modified in 5.x or later.
Actually this is not correct!
The @Unstable marks the first time an API is introduced. All API changes that happen after are stabilization of the first version of the API and this what counts is the first time the API was introduced and after 1 full cycle, we need to remove the @Unstable annotation.
For example: - Git module API was first introduced in 4.2M1 (@Unstable was thus added at the time) - Then in 5.3M1 the package was modified - And in 5.3M2 3 new methods were added
Consequence: in 6.0 we now consider the Git module API as stable since it’s been more than 1 full cycle since it was first introduced. This means that from now on, if we wish to modify this API we need to ensure we don’t break the backward compatibility or we’ll need to send a VOTE if we want to break it and explain why we wish to break it and why there’s no other solution, to try to convince the other committers.
While I agree with your point, I do not see why we could not add new methods, or keep some recent methods with an @unstable flag. Adding new method does not necessarily break an API IMO.
I agree of course. For interfaces this cannot happen but for classes it’s possible to add a new method without breaking backward compatibility. Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:11:04, [email protected] ([email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable annotations to remove:
* commons-job module. Owner: Thomas * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius * platform-url. Owner: Vincent
Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before 5.0M1?
Thanks -Vincent
On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne ([email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
It's not a threat :)
It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x).
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened?
thanks
paul
Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" a écrit : > According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle). > > See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab... > > It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:59 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]>wrote:
On 10 Feb 2014 at 13:55:09, Denis Gervalle ([email protected](mailto: [email protected])) wrote:
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:14:41, [email protected] ([email protected]
(mailto:
[email protected])) wrote:
Note: be careful that you might have added new APIs in a class already having an @Unstable annotation at the class level and thus when you remove that class level annotation you might have to add new @Unstable annotations at the method level if those methods were added/modified in 5.x or later.
Actually this is not correct!
The @Unstable marks the first time an API is introduced. All API changes that happen after are stabilization of the first version of the API and this what counts is the first time the API was introduced and after 1 full cycle, we need to remove the @Unstable annotation.
For example: - Git module API was first introduced in 4.2M1 (@Unstable was thus added at the time) - Then in 5.3M1 the package was modified - And in 5.3M2 3 new methods were added
Consequence: in 6.0 we now consider the Git module API as stable since it’s been more than 1 full cycle since it was first introduced. This means that from now on, if we wish to modify this API we need to ensure we don’t break the backward compatibility or we’ll need to send a VOTE if we want to break it and explain why we wish to break it and why there’s no other solution, to try to convince the other committers.
While I agree with your point, I do not see why we could not add new methods, or keep some recent methods with an @unstable flag. Adding new method does not necessarily break an API IMO.
I agree of course. For interfaces this cannot happen but for classes it’s possible to add a new method without breaking backward compatibility.
Well, for interface, it could be a matter of API vs SPI, but I know we could have a endless discussion on that point.
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent
On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:11:04, [email protected] ([email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable annotations to remove:
* commons-job module. Owner: Thomas * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius * platform-url. Owner: Vincent
Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before 5.0M1?
Thanks -Vincent
On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne ( [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
It's not a threat :)
It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x).
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > Vincent, > is there a clickable list? > A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened? > > thanks > > paul > > > Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" a écrit : >> According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle). >> >> See
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
>> >> It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO
All done on my side for “my” modules. Thanks -Vincent On 4 Feb 2014 at 16:11:04, [email protected] ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
ok I’ve done a full review and here’s the results of unstable annotations to remove:
* commons-job module. Owner: Thomas * platform-git mpdule (GitScriptService). Owner: Vincent * platform-legacy-url. Owner: Vincent * platform-localization. Owner: Thomas * platform-solr (SolrConfiguration, SolrInstance, SolrIndexScriptService). Owner: Marius * platform-url. Owner: Vincent
Could each “owner" please remove the @Unstable annotations found inside classes in the above-mentioned modules when the @since is before 5.0M1?
Thanks -Vincent
On 31 Jan 2014 at 08:51:58, Thomas Mortagne ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
It's not a threat :)
It's actually the opposite here: the point is to indicate that an API is not unstable anymore and cannot be broken (this kind of annotation did not exist in 3.x).
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Vincent, is there a clickable list? A way for a project that links to an older xwiki (e.g. we link to xwiki 3.5) to know that things are threatened?
thanks
paul
Le 31 janv. 2014 à 08:44, "[email protected]" a écrit :
According to your rules since we're starting a new cycle we need to review all existing @Unstable annotations and remove ones that have been there for at least one cycle (i.e. prior to the 5.x cycle).
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#H40Unstab...
It's also the occasion to check @Unstable APIs that we can consider stable now.
_______________________________________________ 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
participants (4)
-
Denis Gervalle -
Paul Libbrecht -
Thomas Mortagne -
vincent＠massol.net