On Sun, 14 Dec 2014, Sawyer X wrote:
This shouldn't be in the migration document since it isn't Dancer core, it's just a plugin API change. The plugin should indicate it. I also support removing the stringification. If a warning is to produced, it means stringification should either be allowed with a warning, or cause a croak instead. Henk, what do you think?
I don't know how many D1 users use the stringification. To ease the migration I would like: - allow stringification with a 'warn' call - a deprecation note in the documentation - new version 2.0.6 - remove the stringification in version 3.0.0 -- Henk
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Gabor Szabo <[email protected]> wrote: IMHO stop the stringification (with some warning) and remove it from the pod as well.(and add it to the Migration document as well). Gabor On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Sawyer X <[email protected]> wrote: You're right. I removed the stringification when redoing the API. I didn't return it and the docs still retain that message. I'm still not sure whether it should stringify. That's always a source of trouble. We could stringify with a deprecation or just keep it. What is your opinion? (other than that the docs should be up-to-date :) On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Gabor Szabo <[email protected]> wrote: Actually, I just noticed the documentation of both modules (Dancer:: and Dancer2::) have this in their pod: "For convenience the object will automagically return the RFC 2307 representation when no method is called on it." Which means it should still stringify to the rfc2307 value. Gabor On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Gabor Szabo <[email protected]> wrote: Finally I got to the point where I was actually testing the part where Dancer2::Plugin::Passphrase is used and I think I there is a change from the API of Dancer::Plugin::Passphrase It seems that the 'generate' method of the new module return a Dancer2::Plugin::Passphrase::Hashed object and does not stringify to the rfc2307 value as happened in the case of the Dancer1 version. Looking at the documentation I see both say that I should store the ->rfc2307 value, but because of the stringification I have missed that earlier. If you decided to not include the stringification, then maybe this should be emphasized in the docs as well. Gabor _______________________________________________ dancer-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users
_______________________________________________ dancer-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users
