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

1.4 -> 2.0 migration issues with SafeRequest/Response #47

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue May 20, 2015 · 1 comment
Closed

1.4 -> 2.0 migration issues with SafeRequest/Response #47

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue May 20, 2015 · 1 comment

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

Due to release and testing cycles, I am using the latest stable release as
of a couple weeks ago, which is 1.4.  Even if the 2.0 changes are
backported, that doesn’t solve the problem of timelines or the removal of
classes.  The issue here is breaking existing implementations.  Kevin made
the following suggestion for 2.0 which makes some sense

In the case of SafeRequest and SafeResponse if it's simply a case of them
being renamed to SecurityWrapperRequest and SecurityWrapperResponse
respectively we can just do something like this:

                /** Old class name for {@code SecurityWrapperRequest}.
                 * @see SecurityWrapperRequest
                 * @deprecated This class will be removed in release 2.1.
             *             Use {@code SecurityWrapperRequest} instead.
                 */

                public class SafeRequest extends SecurityWrapperRequest {
                  ... declare / implement whatever public CTORs you
previously had ...
                }

and ditto for SafeResponse. Then people's old code should still work. Come
release 2.1 (or 3.0 or whatever), remove this.



Original issue reported on code.google.com by manico.james@gmail.com on 5 Nov 2009 at 10:47

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

fixed a while ago

Original comment by manico.james@gmail.com on 1 Nov 2010 at 12:44

  • Changed state: Fixed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant