From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>
Cc: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>,
Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] doc: add deprecation marker usage
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:33:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a5432b41-b05b-941c-63f3-bca09005c6a6@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <322d6651-3520-4c07-4bf2-e605da06f525@intel.com>
On 01/24/2019 03:31 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 1/23/2019 11:07 PM, Kevin Traynor wrote:
>> On 01/22/2019 05:23 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>> Define '__rte_deprecated' usage process.
>>>
>>> Suggests keeping old API with '__rte_deprecated' marker including
>>> next LTS, they will be removed just after the LTS release.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>> Acked-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>> ---
>>> Cc: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
>>> Cc: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
>>> Cc: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>
>>> Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
>>>
>>> v2:
>>> * Rephrased as commented
>>>
>>> v3:
>>> * changed when to remove the deprecated API. It is now just after
>>> an LTS release, the motivation is to keep changes small in LTS.
>>> Based on techboard discussion:
>>> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-January/123519.html
>>> ---
>>> doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst | 9 +++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst b/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst
>>> index bfc27fbe0..977d06c60 100644
>>> --- a/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst
>>> +++ b/doc/guides/contributing/versioning.rst
>>> @@ -125,6 +125,15 @@ added to the Release Notes:
>>> these changes. Binaries using this library built prior to version 2.1 will
>>> require updating and recompilation.
>>>
>>> +New API replacing previous one
>>> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> +
>>> +If a new API proposed functionally replaces an existing one, when the
>>> +new API becomes active then the old one is marked with ``__rte_deprecated``.
>>
>> I don't think it's clear what 'active' means here. Can it be re-phrased
>> as something like "..when the new API has it's experimental tag removed,
>> then the old one..".
>
> This was what in my mind by 'active' but didn't want to create confusion with
> details, and really it doesn't matter the "experimental" detail, by any means if
> the new API is not 'active' we shouldn't mark the old one as 'deprecated'.
>
> But agree can be defined better than 'active'. Do you have any suggestion here,
> 'GA', 'public', 'official', 'supported'?
>
How about 'non-experimental' ? I think it would make it clear in meaning
for general reading and also avoid a mis-interpretation of what the
actual detail is.
>>
>> It might also be worth mentioning the reasoning behind this, perhaps
>> something like: This is so an application continues to be provided with
>> at least one stable (non-deprecated/non-experimental) API for this
>> functionality.
>>
>>> +Deprecated APIs removed completely just after the next LTS.
>>> +
>>> +Reminder that new API should follow deprecation process to become active.
>>> +
>>>
>>> Experimental APIs
>>> -----------------
>>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-24 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-19 12:52 [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/2] doc: clean ABI/API policy guide Ferruh Yigit
2018-12-19 12:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/2] doc: add deprecation marker usage Ferruh Yigit
2018-12-20 8:02 ` Luca Boccassi
2018-12-21 15:52 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-12-20 8:02 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/2] doc: clean ABI/API policy guide Luca Boccassi
2018-12-20 8:03 ` Luca Boccassi
2018-12-21 15:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 " Ferruh Yigit
2018-12-21 15:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] doc: add deprecation marker usage Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-22 16:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] doc: clean ABI/API policy guide Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-22 16:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] doc: make RTE_NEXT_ABI optional Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-22 16:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] doc: add deprecation marker usage Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-23 23:07 ` Kevin Traynor
2019-01-24 14:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-24 15:33 ` Kevin Traynor [this message]
2019-01-24 16:29 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-23 8:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] doc: clean ABI/API policy guide Neil Horman
2019-01-24 18:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-24 18:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] doc: make RTE_NEXT_ABI optional Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-31 17:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-01-24 18:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] doc: add deprecation marker usage Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-31 17:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-02-01 17:06 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-03-01 16:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-01-31 17:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] doc: clean ABI/API policy guide Kevin Traynor
2019-03-01 17:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 " Ferruh Yigit
2019-03-01 17:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] doc: make RTE_NEXT_ABI optional Ferruh Yigit
2019-03-01 17:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] doc: add deprecation marker usage Ferruh Yigit
2019-03-01 17:40 ` Kevin Traynor
2019-03-27 13:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-27 13:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a5432b41-b05b-941c-63f3-bca09005c6a6@redhat.com \
--to=ktraynor@redhat.com \
--cc=bluca@debian.org \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
--cc=marko.kovacevic@intel.com \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=yskoh@mellanox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).