Difference between revisions of "Uno/API Deprecation"
From Apache OpenOffice Wiki
< Uno
(→If/How to Deprecate/Change/Remove UNO API) |
B michaelsen (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
* css::document::XDocumentInfo [[User:mst]] | * css::document::XDocumentInfo [[User:mst]] | ||
* css::beans::StringPair - there's the generic beans::Pair<> type now [[User:thorsten]] | * css::beans::StringPair - there's the generic beans::Pair<> type now [[User:thorsten]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Uno]] | ||
Revision as of 10:10, 28 March 2010
If/How to Deprecate/Change/Remove UNO API
Discussion has been going on for years what to do with known-stale/badly designed/un-used UNO IDL types. Here's an attempt to collect some ideas.
Random ideas:
- decide on rules when published types may be removed or changed:
- number of clients in OOo
- (estimated) use outside OOo project (i.e. people that don't read interface-announce)
- how "bad" is the API - i.e. if everybody agrees it plainly sucks, remove anyway despite points above
- deprecate in one feature release (add a suitable warning mechanism when using such API)
- remove in the following feature release
- limit impact considerations to non-ABI-dependent UNO bindings (i.e. the assumption is that c++ components break randomly anyway for every other release, so they shouldn't block API changes)
Kill file
List of problematic API that should be considered for deprecation/change/removal:
- css::document::XDocumentInfo User:mst
- css::beans::StringPair - there's the generic beans::Pair<> type now User:thorsten
