I think it could introduce compilation error when removing the throws part of a method signature. As if there is no exception thrown but you have a 'try...catch' then there will be a compilation error...
It requires a code change sometimes but anyway, you just need to remove the 'try...catch', no other big impacts. So for me I would also like to mark it as incomplete and change it directly in 3.0.0. Thanks. Sean Busbey <[email protected]> 于2020年11月30日周一 上午2:51写道： > I think we should change what they throw directly and label it > incompatible. I think this is in line with our previous expectation setting > about how we'll handle mistakes in the API. > > That change would be source incompatible but would still be binary > compatible. > > I think we should do it in a major release. esp since there's not a way in > Java to say "this deprecation is just about the thrown exceptions" and it > will be awkward to write code that is source compatible with the existing > api and with the exception removed. > > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020, 22:07 张铎(Duo Zhang) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > In HBASE-24966, we found that in AsyncTableRegionLocator, we accidentally > > declared 3 methods > > > > getStartKeys > > getEndKeys > > getStartEndKeys > > > > to throw IOException directly. > > > > This should be a copy paste mistake, as typically, for a method which > > returns CompletableFuture, the exception should be returned through the > > CompletableFuture, and this is exactly the behavior of these methods. > > > > So the actual problem is only that we have a wrong method signature. but > > since this interface is IA.Public, and it has already been included in > > several releases, according to our compatibility rule, we can not just > > remove the throws part from the method. Instead, we need to deprecate > them > > and create new methods. But there will be another problem that we want to > > align the method names between the sync and async client, so if we change > > the names of the methods, we'd better also change the name of methods for > > sync client, which will make our users do more unnecessary work. > > > > So here I want to discuss that, since we all know that, this is a > mistake, > > and the methods will never throw IOException directly, is it OK for us to > > just remove the throws part and tell users directly that this is a > mistake, > > and release it in the next minor release or a major release as an > > incompatible change? > > > > Thanks. > > >
