Re: [DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-20 Thread ConradJam
+1 @Chesnay ScheplerI'd like to be assigned the task to try to do it ~ Jing Ge 于2023年7月18日周二 17:54写道: > got it thanks! > > For @Deprecated, I meant to force using like: @Deprecated(since = "1.18", > forRemoval = true) > > Best regards, > Jing > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 11:06 AM Hong Teoh

Re: [DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-18 Thread Jing Ge
got it thanks! For @Deprecated, I meant to force using like: @Deprecated(since = "1.18", forRemoval = true) Best regards, Jing On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 11:06 AM Hong Teoh wrote: > +1 to this. Nice to simplify the REST API! > > > Regards, > Hong > > > > On 18 Jul 2023, at 10:00, Chesnay

Re: [DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-18 Thread Hong Teoh
+1 to this. Nice to simplify the REST API! Regards, Hong > On 18 Jul 2023, at 10:00, Chesnay Schepler wrote: > > Something to note is that the UI is using this parameter, and would have to > be changed to the new one. > > Since we want to avoid having to split arguments ourselves, this may

Re: [DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-18 Thread Chesnay Schepler
Something to note is that the UI is using this parameter, and would have to be changed to the new one. Since we want to avoid having to split arguments ourselves, this may imply changes to the UI. On 18/07/2023 10:18, Chesnay Schepler wrote: We'll log a warn message when it is used and

Re: [DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-18 Thread Chesnay Schepler
We'll log a warn message when it is used and maybe hide it from the docs. Archunit rule doesn't really work here because it's not annotated with stability annotations (as it shouldn't since the classes aren't really user-facing). On 17/07/2023 21:56, Jing Ge wrote: Hi Chesnay, I am trying

Re: [DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-17 Thread Jing Ge
Hi Chesnay, I am trying to understand what is the right removal process with this concrete example. Given all things about the programArgs are private or package private except the constructor. Will you just mark it as deprecated with constructor overloading in 1.18 and remove it in 2.0? Should

Re: [DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-16 Thread Xintong Song
+1 Best, Xintong On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 9:34 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: > Hello, > > The request body for the jar run/plan REST endpoints accepts program > arguments as a string (programArgs) or a list of strings > (programArgsList). The latter was introduced as kept running into issues >

[DISCUSS][2.0] FLIP-337: Remove JarRequestBody#programArgs

2023-07-13 Thread Chesnay Schepler
Hello, The request body for the jar run/plan REST endpoints accepts program arguments as a string (programArgs) or a list of strings (programArgsList). The latter was introduced as kept running into issues with splitting the string into individual arguments./ / We ideally force users to use