If no other objections tomorrow, will follow what Sean proposed above, to include the patch in 3.0.0 and mark the issue as incompatible change.
Thanks. 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2020年11月30日周一 上午11:04写道： > 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 <bus...@apache.org> 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) <palomino...@gmail.com> 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. >> > >> >
