+1 on removing InterfaceStability annotation for IA.Public. Even more, is it possible to forbid using these two annotations together in Yetus at code-level if we are migrating to it (as mentioned in another thread)?
For IA.Private or IA.LimitedPrivate, personally I think InterfaceStability is still a useful annotation. Best Regards, Yu On 20 March 2017 at 22:07, Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org> wrote: > I really dislike having InterfaceStability markings on IA.Public > interfaces, because to me it reads like us essentially saying we > didn't invest enough time in deciding what something should look like > before declaring it safe for downstream folks. If someone is > comfortable with the risk of an API that can change in minor or > maintenance releases, what's gained by calling it IA.Public + > IS.Evolving or Unstable rather than just labeling it IA.Private or > IA.LimitedPrivate? > > So I'd be +1 on updating our docs to state that InterfaceStability is > just for IA.LimitedPrivate or even discontinuing our use of it > entirely. > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 11:28 PM, Duo Zhang <zhang...@apache.org> wrote: > > In the compatibility section of our refguide, the compatibility for patch > > version, minor version and major version is not related > > to InterfaceStability annotation. The only place we mention it is for > > Server-Side Limited API compatibility. > > > > And in the Developer Guidelines section, we say this > > @InterfaceStability.Evolving > > > > Public packages marked as evolving may be changed, but it is discouraged. > > I think this is a little confusing, esepecially that the comment > > of InterfaceStability also mentions the compatibility for patch, minor > and > > major release. > > > > For me, I think only InterfaceStability.Unstable is useful for public > API. > > It means the API is still experimental and will not respect the > > compatibility rule. > > > > So here I suggest we just remove the InterfaceStability annoation for the > > classes which are marked as InterfaceAudience.Public, and change the > > comment of InterfaceStability and also the refguide to be more specific. > > > > Suggestions are welcomed. > > > > Thanks. >
