-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.6k
[Notifier] [BC BREAK] Final classes #39557
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
Conversation
OskarStark
commented
Dec 18, 2020
Q | A |
---|---|
Branch? | 5.x |
Bug fix? | no |
New feature? | no, BC BREAK, but experimental |
Deprecations? | no |
Tickets | --- |
License | MIT |
Doc PR | --- |
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.
I'm ":+0:":
My general opinion about final
is that's an authoritarian keyword that removes power from end users without necessarily easing maintenance - thus with no practical benefit - actually with a real drawback.
Final proved to be useful when we need to add more type hints, but here, all methods are fully typed.
I agree, but who knows whats coming, and the other bridges have a final keyword + the brdiges are experimental now. Just my 2cents, feel free to close |
BTW it helps to bring back people here if this class does not fit some of their requirements, instead of just extending the class... |
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.
For consistency at least, others are final already (and I'm fine with that)
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.
👍🏻 for final
here. Extending the transport factories does not make sense at all.
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.
Could you please rebase?
5.3.0 | ||
----- | ||
|
||
* [BC BREAK] `LinkedInTransportFactory` is now final |
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.
Shouldn't it be reported in UPGRADE-5.3.md
?
----- | ||
|
||
* [BC BREAK] `ZulipTransport` is now final | ||
* [BC BREAK] `ZulipTransportFactory` is now final |
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.
same
073c490
to
5bd3643
Compare
Rebased @jderusse not sure why the lower build fails 🧐 Shall I or not add/move it to the upgrade file? I didn't do that either in the Return Type fix PR, Sorry I don't have a PR number yet, I am currently on a phone 📱 |
5bd3643
to
733ba61
Compare
Thank you @OskarStark. |
This PR was merged into the 5.2 branch. Discussion ---------- [Notifier] Make sure Smsapi 5.2 has a changelog | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 5.2 | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tickets | | License | MIT | Doc PR | Im not sure what the best way to fix this issue is. The smsapi bridge was released in 5.2 without a changelog. In 5.3 we added a changelog and incorrectly stated that the package was first released in 5.3. Related PR: #39557 Packagist: https://packagist.org/packages/symfony/smsapi-notifier This PR adds the changelog for 5.2 and I hope the maintainer that do the merge up handles the conflict correctly. Commits ------- 984e890 Make sure Smsapi 5.2 has a changelog