[PropertyInfo] remove deprecations, mark TypeInfo as experimental #54789
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dunglas
approved these changes
Apr 30, 2024
fabpot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2024
This PR was merged into the 7.1 branch. Discussion ---------- [TypeInfo] mark classes as experimental | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 7.1 | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | no | Deprecations? | no | License | MIT This is following a discussion on slack with authors of the component, I feel that the TypeInfo component should have an experimental phase as we need to prove the component's functionality on software that is built on top of type information extraction. Here's a non-exhaustive list of software using the PropertyInfo Type class (thanks to `@mtarld`): - api-platform/core - nelmio/api-doc-bundle - typo3/cms-extbase - typo3/cms - sonata-project/page-bundle - jolicode/automapper - symfony/ux-live-component These softwares should try their best in testing the new TypeInfo component and report back misfunctionalities and/or DX improvements before we can consider this non-experimental. See also #54789 Commits ------- 28b6495 [TypeInfo] mark classes as experimental
fabpot
approved these changes
May 2, 2024
ebd9d07 to
08ac161
Compare
|
I've done the changes in CHANGELOG and UPGRADE files. |
|
Thank you @soyuka. |
This was referenced May 2, 2024
Merged
|
Thanks @fabpot for the changelog |
xabbuh
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 15, 2024
…acts (xabbuh) This PR was merged into the 7.1 branch. Discussion ---------- [PropertyInfo] remove no longer needed deprecation contracts | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 7.1 | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | no | Deprecations? | no | Issues | | License | MIT the dependency was introduced in #53160, but is no longer required since we reverted the deprecations in #54789 Commits ------- 18296cd remove no longer needed deprecation contracts
This was referenced May 21, 2024
|
Follow-up: #56848 |
derrabus
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2024
… (derrabus) This PR was merged into the 7.1 branch. Discussion ---------- [DoctrineBridge] Undeprecate DoctrineExtractor::getTypes() | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 7.1 | Bug fix? | yes | New feature? | no | Deprecations? | no | Issues | N/A | License | MIT The deprecation of the `PropertyTypeExtractorInterface::getTypes()` method was taken back in #54789. As long as the method exists on the interface, we cannot remove any implementations. Thus, I'm undeprecating the implementation in `DoctrineExtractor` as well. Commits ------- eb319a2 Undeprecate DoctrineExtractor::getTypes()
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follows #54788 as we can introduce these deprecation back when we feel the component is stable enough. Software like API Platform that heavily relies on the deprecated functionalities will have a really hard time migrating, we don't want to work more then needed and need to know we won't have to do the same work again in the next years.
This also suggest that PropertyInfo can work with or without the new TypeInfo component while it's being experimental.