---- On Thu, 09 Jul 2020 11:45:19 -0500 Arx Cruz <arxcruz@redhat.com> wrote ----
Yes, that's the idea. We can keep the old interface for a few cycles, with warning deprecation message advertising to use the new one, and then remove in the future.
Deprecating things leads to two situations which really need some good reason before doing it: - If we keep the deprecated interfaces working along with new interfaces then it is confusion for users as well as maintenance effort. In my experience, very less migration happen to new things if old keep working. - If we remove them in future then it is breaking change. IMO, we need to first ask/analyse whether name changes are worth to do with above things as results. Or in other team we should first define what is 'outdated naming conventions' and how worth to fix those. -gmann
Kind regards,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:15 PM Luigi Toscano <ltoscano@redhat.com> wrote:
-- Arx Cruz Software Engineer Red Hat EMEA arxcruz@redhat.com @RedHat Red Hat Red Hat On Thursday, 9 July 2020 17:57:14 CEST Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
---- On Thu, 09 Jul 2020 10:14:58 -0500 Arx Cruz <arxcruz@redhat.com> wrote ----
Hello, I would like to start a discussion regarding the topic. At this moment in time we have an opportunity to be a more open and inclusive project by eliminating outdated naming conventions from tempest codebase, such as blacklist, whitelist.We should take the opportunity and do our best to replace outdated terms with their more inclusive alternatives.As you can see in [1] the TripleO project is already working on this initiative, and I would like to work on this as well on the tempest side. Thanks Arx for raising it.
I always have hard time to understand the definition of 'outdated naming conventions ' are they outdated from coding language perspective or outdated as English language perspective? I do not see naming used in coding language should be matched with English as grammar/outdated/new style language. As long as they are not so bad (hurt anyone culture, abusing word etc) it is fine to keep them as it is and start adopting new names for new things we code.
For me, naming convention are the things which always can be improved over time, none of the name is best suited for everyone in open source. But we need to understand whether it is worth to do in term of 1. effort of changing those 2. un- comfortness of adopting new names 3. again changing in future.
At least from Tempest perspective, blacklist is very known common word used for lot of interfaces and dependent testing tool. I cannot debate on how good it is or bad but i can debate on not-worth to change now. For new interface, we can always use best-suggested name as per that time/culture/maintainers. We have tried few of such improvement in past but end up not-successful. Example: - https://opendev.org/openstack/tempest/src/commit/e1eebfa8451d4c28bef0669e4a 7f493b6086cab9/tempest/test.py#L43
That's not the only used terminology for list of things, though. We could always add new interfaces and keep the old ones are deprecated (but not advertised) for the foreseable future. The old code won't be broken and the new one would use the new terminology, I'd say it's a good solution.
-- Luigi