Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

Document the weak_vendors value#7453

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Merged
xabbuh merged 1 commit intosymfony:masterfromgreg0ire:weak_vendors
Mar 13, 2017
Merged

Conversation

@greg0ire
Copy link
Contributor

@greg0iregreg0ire commentedFeb 7, 2017
edited by javiereguiluz
Loading

@greg0ire
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Code PR:symfony/symfony#21539

Copy link
Member

@nicolas-grekasnicolas-grekas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Should be more descriptive imho

also set the value ``"weak"`` which will make the bridge ignore any deprecation
notices. This is useful to projects that must use deprecated interfaces for
backward compatibility reasons.
backward compatibility reasons, or for libraries with lots of vendors that

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Lots of is undefined to the reader, it doesn't help one understand if that applies to its use cases or not

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

@greg0iregreg0ireFeb 7, 2017
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

I guess one dependency with many deprecations is enough indeed.

notices. This is useful to projects that must use deprecated interfaces for
backward compatibility reasons.
backward compatibility reasons, or for libraries with lots of vendors that
can create a sudden backlog of deprecations to fix that would otherwise prevent

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Same for sudden imho

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

I want to convey the fact that this can happen without any code change in the lib itself, because dependencies are not locked.

backward compatibility reasons.
backward compatibility reasons, or for libraries with lots of vendors that
can create a sudden backlog of deprecations to fix that would otherwise prevent
unrelated pull requests from being merged… which leads us to ``"weak_vendors"``.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Ellipses suggest the reader understood, which might be not true yet

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Replaced the ellipsis withdescribed below so that the reader doesn't feel like they missed something.

@nicolas-grekas
Copy link
Member

(but not longer ;) )

greg0ire reacted with laugh emoji

@greg0ire
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

I reworked it a bit. Reviewers, feel free to point me to parts that you feel are too verbose / superfluous.

the Composer lock file, which would create another class of issues. Libraries
will often use ``SYMFONY_DEPRECATIONS_HELPER=weak`` because of this. This has
the drawback of allowing contributions that introduce deprecations but:
* forget to fix the deprecated calls if there are any;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Does not render as a bullet list because of missing new line.

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Good catch! Fixed!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Woops, I think I amended a very old commit and force pushed it.

julienfalque reacted with laugh emoji
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Fixed again

@javiereguiluzjaviereguiluz changed the titleDocument the weak_vendors value[WCM] Document the weak_vendors valueFeb 12, 2017
fabpot added a commit to symfony/symfony that referenced this pull requestFeb 28, 2017
This PR was merged into the 3.3-dev branch.Discussion----------Introduce weak vendors modeDeprecations coming from the vendors are segregated from otherdeprecations. A new mode is introduced, in which deprecations comingfrom the vendors are not taken into account when deciding to exit withan error code.| Q             | A| ------------- | ---| Branch?       | master| Bug fix?      | no| New feature?  | no| BC breaks?    | no| Deprecations? | no| Tests pass?   | yes| License       | MIT| Doc PR        |symfony/symfony-docs#7453<!--- Bug fixes must be submitted against the lowest branch where they apply  (lowest branches are regularly merged to upper ones so they get the fixes too).- Features and deprecations must be submitted against the master branch.- Please fill in this template according to the PR you're about to submit.- Replace this comment by a description of what your PR is solving.-->Sample output :# Weak vendor mode## With both vendors and non-vendor errors```WARNINGS!Tests: 1068, Assertions: 2714, Warnings: 6, Skipped: 15.Remaining deprecation notices (1)some error: 1x    1x in SonataAdminBundleTest::testBuild from Sonata\AdminBundle\TestsRemaining vendor deprecation notices (4)Legacy deprecation notices (48)```Exit code is 1## After fixing non-vendor errors```WARNINGS!Tests: 1068, Assertions: 2714, Warnings: 6, Skipped: 15.Remaining vendor deprecation notices (4)Legacy deprecation notices (48)```Exit code is 0# TODO- [x] fix colorization issues (vendor deprecation notices are always in red)- [x] make the vendor detection more robust- [x] make the vendor dir configurable- [x] ~figure out how to run tests and~ add more of them    - [x] test on non-vendor file    - [x] test on vendor file- [x] do not change the output of other modesCommits-------61fd043 Introduce weak vendors mode
@greg0ire
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Please remove the [WCM] tag and review this

@javiereguiluzjaviereguiluz changed the title[WCM] Document the weak_vendors valueDocument the weak_vendors valueFeb 28, 2017
Copy link
Member

@javiereguiluzjaviereguiluz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

👍

Really well explained! Thanks@greg0ire

@greg0ire
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Glad you like it@javiereguiluz !

@xabbuhxabbuh added this to the3.3 milestoneMar 6, 2017
backward compatibility reasons.
backward compatibility reasons, or for libraries that do not want deprecations
triggered by their dependencies to prevent unrelated pull requests from being
merged, which leads us to the ``"weak_vendors"`` value, described below.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

I would revert the changes to this paragraph.

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Why? What's wrong with trying to make a smooth transition like that?

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

After more thinking, maybe you're right, I'm kind of explaining the same thing twice here.

@xabbuh
Copy link
Member

Thank you@greg0ire.

@xabbuhxabbuh merged commitabe88c6 intosymfony:masterMar 13, 2017
xabbuh added a commit that referenced this pull requestMar 13, 2017
This PR was merged into the master branch.Discussion----------Document the weak_vendors valueSeesymfony/symfony#21539Commits-------abe88c6 Document the weak_vendors value
@greg0iregreg0ire deleted the weak_vendors branchMarch 13, 2017 09:31
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@nicolas-grekasnicolas-grekasnicolas-grekas left review comments

@xabbuhxabbuhxabbuh left review comments

@javiereguiluzjaviereguiluzjaviereguiluz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@julienfalquejulienfalquejulienfalque left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Projects

None yet

Milestone

3.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@greg0ire@nicolas-grekas@xabbuh@javiereguiluz@julienfalque@carsonbot

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp