What is everyone's opinion on the issue of backward compatibility of server raft? The specific plan can be found in the previous email content.
Jianbin Chen, githubId: funky-eyes Min Ji <[email protected]> 于 2024年1月25日周四 15:13写道： > Regarding this, my understanding is that compatibility with lower-version > user SPI implementations is required. I have already listed a broad range > of APIs that need to be adapted in the discuss document. > > > Warm regards, > > Ji Min > > > funky-eyes (via GitHub) <[email protected]> 于2024年1月25日周四 10:20写道： > > > > > GitHub user funky-eyes added a comment to the discussion: How to smooth > > the upgrade after transferring to an apache organization > > > > 我想我遗漏了一点，我们的spi是否要向下兼容，这是一个问题。让我举个例子以便于理解： > > > > > 假设用户使用`io.seata.rm.datasource.exec.InsertExecutor`，当我们改动了包名就为`org.apache.seata.rm.datasource.exec.InsertExecutor` > > 此时用户升级了seata版本为apache seata时就会失效。 > > 我不确定我们是否要像dubbo一样，对老的spi实现保持兼容。 > > > > I think I'm missing the point that it's a matter of whether or not our > spi > > is going to be backward compatible. Let me give you an example to make it > > easier to understand: Suppose the user is using > > `io.seata.rm.datasource.exec.InsertExecutor` and when we change the > package > > name to `org.apache.seata.rm.datasource.exec. InsertExecutor` fails when > > the user upgrades the seata version to apache seata. I'm not sure we want > > to keep compatibility with older spi implementations like dubbo. > > > > GitHub link: > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-seata/discussions/6059#discussioncomment-8239767 > > > > ---- > > This is an automatically sent email for [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe, please send an email to: > [email protected] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > >
