[chainsaw] Lots of commented code // Backwards compatibility?

[Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org>]

Hi,

Looking through the code base, I saw lots of code that is commented. Some classes (maybe because of this) are not even used anymore. I only saw one class (ChainsawViewer), which might make sense to keep.

Is it OK to remove this all? Or is there a specific reason for this?

Some methods are no longer used or empty despite not being commented. I would also like to remove them when they don't have any purpose. Since they are public, BC is no longer guaranteed. For a Standalone app like this, I don't consider this a problem, but I would like to know if there are any objections.

Kind regards,
Christian

Re: [chainsaw] Lots of commented code // Backwards compatibility?

[Robert Middleton <rm...@apache.org>]

Yes, it was mostly to get rid of the log4j1 dependency and to get rid
of/update other dependencies.  There are a number of parts of chainsaw that
depend on log4j1 features which may or may not be relevant.

Most of the UI functionality should still exist, as far as I am aware.  I
think some of the receivers are commented out because they depend on very
old versions of libraries, so it was easier to comment them out for the
time being rather than try to update them to newer dependencies.

-Robert Middleton

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 6:14 PM Scott Deboy <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think Robert commented out most of that to get rid of the log4j1
> dependency. I'm slightly concerned we'll lose a ton of UI
> functionality in that process, but it's in history if it's still
> needed, so delete away if you'd like.
>
> For comparison, you can look at the 'chainsaw-with-log4j1-dep' branch.
>
> Scott
>
> On 9/29/23, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Looking through the code base, I saw lots of code that is commented. Some
> > classes (maybe because of this) are not even used anymore. I only saw one
> > class (ChainsawViewer), which might make sense to keep.
> >
> > Is it OK to remove this all? Or is there a specific reason for this?
> >
> > Some methods are no longer used or empty despite not being commented. I
> > would also like to remove them when they don't have any purpose. Since
> they
> > are public, BC is no longer guaranteed. For a Standalone app like this, I
> > don't consider this a problem, but I would like to know if there are any
> > objections.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Christian
> >
> >
>

Re: [chainsaw] Lots of commented code // Backwards compatibility?

[Scott Deboy <sc...@gmail.com>]

I think Robert commented out most of that to get rid of the log4j1
dependency. I'm slightly concerned we'll lose a ton of UI
functionality in that process, but it's in history if it's still
needed, so delete away if you'd like.

For comparison, you can look at the 'chainsaw-with-log4j1-dep' branch.

Scott

On 9/29/23, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Looking through the code base, I saw lots of code that is commented. Some
> classes (maybe because of this) are not even used anymore. I only saw one
> class (ChainsawViewer), which might make sense to keep.
>
> Is it OK to remove this all? Or is there a specific reason for this?
>
> Some methods are no longer used or empty despite not being commented. I
> would also like to remove them when they don't have any purpose. Since they
> are public, BC is no longer guaranteed. For a Standalone app like this, I
> don't consider this a problem, but I would like to know if there are any
> objections.
>
> Kind regards,
> Christian
>
>