-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 737
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Deprecate unsuffixed processor classes #1893
Deprecate unsuffixed processor classes #1893
Conversation
c720a29
to
507d174
Compare
Can you share some background on why you want to suffix them all? Is the plan to suffix all the other assets too like Aggregations (see the other discussion). |
Yes, see my comment: #1880 (comment) |
da8474d
to
1330f6e
Compare
I must confess I'm torn on this. I definitively don't like the conflicts but at the same time it seems extreme for 2-3 conflicts to rename ALL classes and with it basically force all users to modify their app at one stage. Instead I would probably more have a default fallback way that we use for the conflicts but keep as is. If I understand this change right and we follow through with it, it will affect the majority of classes in the library? |
Yes at least, for the main ones (and most subject to colliding with reserved keywords) in the There's also the comment of @krewetka regarding class name and their readibility that I 👍 : #1880 (comment) But that's not a blocker, the goal here is to clean / unify things, this can be ignored (and this PR closed) if we're not agreeing on this point ;) |
@thePanz Would be great to get one more opinion on this, could you chime in? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can but in case of inheritance this allow to properly infer the right type. This should be solved with |
May I merge this one ? |
@deguif Go for it. |
1330f6e
to
9875a54
Compare
No description provided.