You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> on 2008/08/16 02:12:30 UTC
Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Hi,
We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as SCANode2,
SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I propose that we
rename them back to Node/node.
If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
Thanks,
Raymond
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by haleh mahbod <hm...@gmail.com>.
Doesn't deprecation mean the code will be there for a while and therefore
the new code will not break existing user code?
How long will deprecated code stay around in Tuscany? It would be good to
establish a guideline so users can plan to move to the new code.
Can there be a log of deprecated APIs under documentation page or download
page? This will help users to better plan for moving code to the new
APIs/SPIs.
On 8/21/08, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I don't think we should do this yet. We've only just put Node2 out in a
> release and users have just started to move from the SCADomain APIs to it so
> to turn around an immediately deprecate it doesn't give a very good user
> experience, and one of our users has even replied to this thread saying
> that.
>
> And I don't think we should deprecate it till we know what the final stable
> API is and I don't think we know Node2 is it yet. Its not great you need to
> cast to the SCAClient so thats one thing that could be improved, there's the
> various spec group proposals going on for the client APIs that will be
> resolved at some point which we'll need to make updates for, I've got a work
> item i need to do in the next couple of months on the client APIs and that
> will likely require changes. Just yesterday there was the new proposal for
> how our samples should be using the SCA programming model. All that to me
> says we should wait a bit for things to settle down before making breaking
> changes or deprecating anything, is there any real need to rush this in?
>
> ...ant
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> OK. Instead of renaming, I'll add SCANodeFactory/SCANode and leave the
>> SCANode2Factory/SCANode2 deprecated. Existing samples or itests will be
>> migrated to use SCANodeFactory/SCANode. Meanwhile I'll change the maven
>> artifact ids from node2-xxx to node-xxx.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>>
>> From: ant elder
>> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:17 AM
>>
>> To: dev@tuscany.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
>>
>>
>> I agree with Dave and think we should leave this to try for a while before
>> settling on it as a long term final api.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thank you for sharing your thought. Which set of Tuscany APIs are you
>> using? SCADomain or SCANode2?
>>
>> I agree that we have to be extra careful to maintain the compatibility for
>> APIs. But we also have to bite the bullet sometimes as the project evolves,
>> otherwise it will create even more compatibility issues and confusions over
>> time. Unfortunately we have been in this half-compatibility mode for a while
>> and that's probably why it becomes difficult to follow as we give the users
>> too many choices :-(. Worth to point out is that I proposed this change for
>> the trunk instead of 1.3.x branches.
>>
>> If most of the users still use the SCADomain (due to the fact that most of
>> our samples are using SCADomain without deprecation), it's probably better
>> to rename the SCANode2 sooner than later before it gets popular :-). YMMV.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Dave Sowerby" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:10 AM
>> To: <de...@tuscany.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found
>> it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also
>> that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and
>> then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dave.
>>
>> --
>> Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as
>> SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I
>> propose that we rename them back to Node/node.
>>
>> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>>
>>
>> We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were the
>> new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think
>> we
>> need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it
>> will
>> break users code.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by Simon Nash <na...@apache.org>.
ant elder wrote:
> I don't think we should do this yet. We've only just put Node2 out in a
> release and users have just started to move from the SCADomain APIs to
> it so to turn around an immediately deprecate it doesn't give a very
> good user experience, and one of our users has even replied to this
> thread saying that.
>
> And I don't think we should deprecate it till we know what the final
> stable API is and I don't think we know Node2 is it yet. Its not great
> you need to cast to the SCAClient so thats one thing that could be
> improved, there's the various spec group proposals going on for the
> client APIs that will be resolved at some point which we'll need to make
> updates for, I've got a work item i need to do in the next couple of
> months on the client APIs and that will likely require changes. Just
> yesterday there was the new proposal for how our samples should be using
> the SCA programming model. All that to me says we should wait a bit for
> things to settle down before making breaking changes or deprecating
> anything, is there any real need to rush this in?
>
> ...ant
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Raymond Feng <enjoyjava@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> OK. Instead of renaming, I'll add SCANodeFactory/SCANode and leave
> the SCANode2Factory/SCANode2 deprecated. Existing samples or itests
> will be migrated to use SCANodeFactory/SCANode. Meanwhile I'll
> change the maven artifact ids from node2-xxx to node-xxx.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> From: ant elder
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:17 AM
>
> To: dev@tuscany.apache.org <ma...@tuscany.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
>
>
> I agree with Dave and think we should leave this to try for a while
> before settling on it as a long term final api.
>
> ...ant
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Raymond Feng <enjoyjava@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for sharing your thought. Which set of Tuscany APIs are
> you using? SCADomain or SCANode2?
>
> I agree that we have to be extra careful to maintain the
> compatibility for APIs. But we also have to bite the bullet
> sometimes as the project evolves, otherwise it will create even more
> compatibility issues and confusions over time. Unfortunately we have
> been in this half-compatibility mode for a while and that's probably
> why it becomes difficult to follow as we give the users too many
> choices :-(. Worth to point out is that I proposed this change for
> the trunk instead of 1.3.x branches.
>
> If most of the users still use the SCADomain (due to the fact that
> most of our samples are using SCADomain without deprecation), it's
> probably better to rename the SCANode2 sooner than later before it
> gets popular :-). YMMV.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Dave Sowerby" <dave.sowerby@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>>
> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:10 AM
> To: <dev@tuscany.apache.org <ma...@tuscany.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
>
>
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found
> it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also
> that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and
> then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
>
> --
> Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <enjoyjava@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as
> SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I
> propose that we rename them back to Node/node.
>
> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
>
> We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they
> were the
> new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i
> think we
> need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as
> it will
> break users code.
>
> ...ant
>
>
Sorry for the delayed response. I have been on vacation for the last week
and I am trying to catch up with my backlog on the ML. I agree that we
should not move too quickly on this renaming. We should wait to get more
experience with these APIs before we declare them final and stable.
Simon
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
I don't think we should do this yet. We've only just put Node2 out in a
release and users have just started to move from the SCADomain APIs to it so
to turn around an immediately deprecate it doesn't give a very good user
experience, and one of our users has even replied to this thread saying
that.
And I don't think we should deprecate it till we know what the final stable
API is and I don't think we know Node2 is it yet. Its not great you need to
cast to the SCAClient so thats one thing that could be improved, there's the
various spec group proposals going on for the client APIs that will be
resolved at some point which we'll need to make updates for, I've got a work
item i need to do in the next couple of months on the client APIs and that
will likely require changes. Just yesterday there was the new proposal for
how our samples should be using the SCA programming model. All that to me
says we should wait a bit for things to settle down before making breaking
changes or deprecating anything, is there any real need to rush this in?
...ant
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK. Instead of renaming, I'll add SCANodeFactory/SCANode and leave the
> SCANode2Factory/SCANode2 deprecated. Existing samples or itests will be
> migrated to use SCANodeFactory/SCANode. Meanwhile I'll change the maven
> artifact ids from node2-xxx to node-xxx.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> From: ant elder
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:17 AM
>
> To: dev@tuscany.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
>
>
> I agree with Dave and think we should leave this to try for a while before
> settling on it as a long term final api.
>
> ...ant
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for sharing your thought. Which set of Tuscany APIs are you
> using? SCADomain or SCANode2?
>
> I agree that we have to be extra careful to maintain the compatibility for
> APIs. But we also have to bite the bullet sometimes as the project evolves,
> otherwise it will create even more compatibility issues and confusions over
> time. Unfortunately we have been in this half-compatibility mode for a while
> and that's probably why it becomes difficult to follow as we give the users
> too many choices :-(. Worth to point out is that I proposed this change for
> the trunk instead of 1.3.x branches.
>
> If most of the users still use the SCADomain (due to the fact that most of
> our samples are using SCADomain without deprecation), it's probably better
> to rename the SCANode2 sooner than later before it gets popular :-). YMMV.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Dave Sowerby" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:10 AM
> To: <de...@tuscany.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
>
>
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found
> it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also
> that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and
> then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
>
> --
> Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as
> SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I
> propose that we rename them back to Node/node.
>
> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
>
> We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were the
> new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think
> we
> need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it
> will
> break users code.
>
> ...ant
>
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
OK. Instead of renaming, I'll add SCANodeFactory/SCANode and leave the
SCANode2Factory/SCANode2 deprecated. Existing samples or itests will be
migrated to use SCANodeFactory/SCANode. Meanwhile I'll change the maven
artifact ids from node2-xxx to node-xxx.
Thanks,
Raymond
From: ant elder
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:17 AM
To: dev@tuscany.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
I agree with Dave and think we should leave this to try for a while before
settling on it as a long term final api.
...ant
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for sharing your thought. Which set of Tuscany APIs are you using?
SCADomain or SCANode2?
I agree that we have to be extra careful to maintain the compatibility for
APIs. But we also have to bite the bullet sometimes as the project evolves,
otherwise it will create even more compatibility issues and confusions over
time. Unfortunately we have been in this half-compatibility mode for a while
and that's probably why it becomes difficult to follow as we give the users
too many choices :-(. Worth to point out is that I proposed this change for
the trunk instead of 1.3.x branches.
If most of the users still use the SCADomain (due to the fact that most of
our samples are using SCADomain without deprecation), it's probably better
to rename the SCANode2 sooner than later before it gets popular :-). YMMV.
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Dave Sowerby" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:10 AM
To: <de...@tuscany.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Hi Guys,
I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found
it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also
that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and
then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as
SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I
propose that we rename them back to Node/node.
If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
Thanks,
Raymond
We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were the
new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think we
need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it will
break users code.
...ant
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
I agree with Dave and think we should leave this to try for a while before
settling on it as a long term final api.
...ant
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for sharing your thought. Which set of Tuscany APIs are you
> using? SCADomain or SCANode2?
>
> I agree that we have to be extra careful to maintain the compatibility for
> APIs. But we also have to bite the bullet sometimes as the project evolves,
> otherwise it will create even more compatibility issues and confusions over
> time. Unfortunately we have been in this half-compatibility mode for a while
> and that's probably why it becomes difficult to follow as we give the users
> too many choices :-(. Worth to point out is that I proposed this change for
> the trunk instead of 1.3.x branches.
>
> If most of the users still use the SCADomain (due to the fact that most of
> our samples are using SCADomain without deprecation), it's probably better
> to rename the SCANode2 sooner than later before it gets popular :-). YMMV.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Dave Sowerby" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:10 AM
> To: <de...@tuscany.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
>
>
> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found
>> it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also
>> that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and
>> then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dave.
>>
>> --
>> Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as
>>>> SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I
>>>> propose that we rename them back to Node/node.
>>>>
>>>> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Raymond
>>>>
>>>
>>> We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were
>>> the
>>> new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think
>>> we
>>> need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it
>>> will
>>> break users code.
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>>
>>>
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Thank you for sharing your thought. Which set of Tuscany APIs are you using?
SCADomain or SCANode2?
I agree that we have to be extra careful to maintain the compatibility for
APIs. But we also have to bite the bullet sometimes as the project evolves,
otherwise it will create even more compatibility issues and confusions over
time. Unfortunately we have been in this half-compatibility mode for a while
and that's probably why it becomes difficult to follow as we give the users
too many choices :-(. Worth to point out is that I proposed this change for
the trunk instead of 1.3.x branches.
If most of the users still use the SCADomain (due to the fact that most of
our samples are using SCADomain without deprecation), it's probably better
to rename the SCANode2 sooner than later before it gets popular :-). YMMV.
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Dave Sowerby" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:10 AM
To: <de...@tuscany.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
> Hi Guys,
>
> I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found
> it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also
> that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and
> then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
>
> --
> Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as
>>> SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I
>>> propose that we rename them back to Node/node.
>>>
>>> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Raymond
>>
>> We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were
>> the
>> new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think
>> we
>> need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it
>> will
>> break users code.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>>
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by Dave Sowerby <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi Guys,
I agree with Ant - as a user of Tuscany for quite some time I've found
it difficult keeping up with the Node api changes - I concur with also
that it would be nice to maintain this current api for a while and
then perhaps look into settling on some longer term final api?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:45 AM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as
>> SCANode2, SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I
>> propose that we rename them back to Node/node.
>>
>> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Raymond
>
> We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were the
> new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think we
> need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it will
> break users code.
>
> ...ant
>
>
Re: Rename Node2/node2 to Node/node in trunk
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We now have the Node APIs in the code base with 2 suffix, such as SCANode2,
> SCANode2Factory and tuscany-node2-api, tuscany-node2-impl. I propose that we
> rename them back to Node/node.
>
> If there is no objection, I'll do it early next week.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
We've only just put these out in a release as Node2 and said they were the
new and better replacement APIs our users should now be using, so i think we
need to keep that working for a while so we shouldn't rename them as it will
break users code.
...ant