Skip to content
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

MAINT: Update version of deprecation_with_replacement #2861

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 8, 2024

Conversation

j-t-1
Copy link
Contributor

@j-t-1 j-t-1 commented Sep 20, 2024

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 20, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.43%. Comparing base (a7d5c8d) to head (19c9c6e).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2861   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.43%   96.43%           
=======================================
  Files          52       52           
  Lines        8726     8726           
  Branches     1721     1721           
=======================================
  Hits         8415     8415           
  Misses        182      182           
  Partials      129      129           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@stefan6419846
Copy link
Collaborator

Seems like we missed them during the cleanup, as they should already have been removed as well - they already were errors if I am not mistaken. Thus I do not really consider this change to be correct. Depending on whether we yank the 5.0.0 release, this might go into the fixed 5.0.0 release with a complete cleanup.

@j-t-1
Copy link
Contributor Author

j-t-1 commented Sep 20, 2024

If it was not an __init__.py file would this change be okay?

Is "AnnotationBuilder" okay to be in __all__?

@stefan6419846
Copy link
Collaborator

No, I am questioning why we are still delaying the deprecation which - if I understand correctly, should already have happened by completely removing the offending code.

@j-t-1
Copy link
Contributor Author

j-t-1 commented Sep 20, 2024

These were deprecate_with_replacement in 4.0.0 and made deprecation_with_replacement in #2813, but the 4.0.0 should have been increased to 5.0.0. However, on further consideration, because it is an __init__.py file I think it needs to be removed from this file. We are agreeing for its removal but for different reasons.

@stefan6419846
Copy link
Collaborator

What is your plan on continuing with this? If ever, we should probably update the version number to 6.0 then to indicate that this is gone in version 5.0?

@j-t-1
Copy link
Contributor Author

j-t-1 commented Oct 8, 2024

I think it should be 5.0.0 if I understand the deprecation process. Previously I said being an __init__.py file is an issue, but on reflection this is okay as these member functions are not being used, only defined.

@pubpub-zz
Copy link
Collaborator

Unless I'm wrong :

  • in v3.17.4 and before, we had:
    deprecate_with_replacement((...), "4.0.0")
    this raises a warning saying that the function(s) will be removed in release 4.0.0

in release 4.x.x, the process was not properly applied ( we should have moved to deprecation)

in 5.0.0, the mistake has been fixed and we moved to `deprecation_with_replacement( (....), "4.0.0")
maybe I should have declared 5.0.0.

in 6.0.0, we will completely removed these functions.
OK for me to validate the PR

@stefan6419846 stefan6419846 merged commit e14b991 into py-pdf:main Oct 8, 2024
16 checks passed
@j-t-1 j-t-1 deleted the deprecation branch October 9, 2024 06:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants