So you have this class or interface you want to rename to something else, because you need to move that type to another package, or you have new co...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
It seems that you're trying to create a technical solution for a non-technical issue. Use semantic versioning and annotate the type deprecated in next minor version. Remove type in next major version.
How lucky you are. You've never had the pleasure of dealing with huge legacy applications ;)
An application so outdated that SemVer did not exist.
This will not be enough, sadly. I need to make the new type usable everywhere the legacy type is.
I'm with Aleksi on this one. Semantic version out the old name, then remove in following version release. Any logic that has to be carried over from the old to the new should be moved and tests created to validate functionality.
As a production system maintainer I always lock my dependencies to major release version. (If a library does not use SemVer, I don't use that package.)
Not sure I understand. Please show me how you would implement a Foo class that would pass the following tests:
github.com/greg0ire/type_deprecati...
It's not an implementation issue imo. This is from Semantic versioning homepage:
Maybe that was unclear (I wrote this in a rush), but this blog post is about how you can implement that part of SemVer (deprecating part of your public API) for php types. Not sure what "It" is referring to in "It's not an implementation issue IMO" or why you two attempt to teach me the basics of SemVer when I'm trying to show how to put it in practice for a specific part of a PHP API.
Ah, with "it" i mean deprecating a type in php. As far as i'm concerned this is enough:
But i also accept the fact that i may have missed some point in this article...
This solution is enough in some situations. In others, you will need inheritance, and in some more complicated situations, you will have to resort to class aliases. That's what I failed to make perfectly clear in my article.
I should do a lot of job for make the class deprecated. A modern IDE helps you to check deprecated class or not using annotation @deprecated. Its always help me. Maybe your approach have a good solution for this case, but your example is not from real life I think
Sorry for the very late response, but it absolutely is from real life: I applied it on a very widely used library with 200 million installs. Is that real life enough for you sir?
Interesting post ! Sadly I don't think it is possible to trigger a deprecation in a straightforward way in the case you present. Furthermore I'm not sure this chunk of code will work in all cases:
If
ShinyNewFoo
is used in your user's code beforeLegacyFoo
, I'm not sure that the deprecation will be triggered.You're correct, that's why I labelled this a best effort, it's really not ideal, but I'm afraid it's all we have.
Is there a GH issue for composer workaround? Composer should fix this instead of encouraging ecosystem to keep on doing this hack.
There even was a pull request, but… github.com/composer/composer/pull/...