Mark several unused deprecated methods/constants/classes in org.eclipse.jface package for removal #3467
Conversation
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
3 times, most recently
from
bc66787 to
614510a
Compare
merks
left a comment
merks
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we should remove a method for which there is no replacement. The original deprecation seems bogus.
| */ | ||
| @Deprecated | ||
| @Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "2025-12") | ||
| protected Label getErrorMessageLabel() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is kind of odd because it doesn't actually specify a replacement and there is no replacement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh ok. So reverting this change.
Some pointers if possible so that i shouldnt do similar updates once again.
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b6f588e to
75c1bb7
Compare
|
@merks Could you take a look at this when you get some time please. |
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
4 times, most recently
from
e034c48 to
e242ef5
Compare
|
@merks |
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
from
e242ef5 to
c9cc1da
Compare
|
@merks can you see if the change is not good for you? @deepika-u can you re-trigger the build? |
vogella
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
from
c9cc1da to
fb9cd14
Compare
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
8 times, most recently
from
22a27f0 to
4b6dd7b
Compare
vogella
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
from
4b6dd7b to
becaa46
Compare
merks
left a comment
merks
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When I see existing calls to newly to-be-removed methods I think we're going down the wrong path.
I'm quite sure that screwing around with ImageDescriptor methods will be a bad thing downstream, and we have evidence of that even here.
|
I wanted to make a general point here as well. If you mark something for removal, please ensure you have the full SDK IDE setup and that you look at the call hierarchy of each and every field, method, or class you plan to mark for deletion. If you find even one use of it, you can assume that you will find 1000 uses of it out there in the ecosystem such that if you delete that thing, there will be things that simply stop working. Then you should ask yourself, is there significant value in the removal that offsets the broken functionality downstream, keeping in mind that any broken functionality in any IDE for any component will generally create a bad impression overall; one that generally comes back to roost in the Platform. Is it worth it? |
|
Especially at least Platform itself must be free from any references first, as otherwise builds in the sub repositories will start to fail! |
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
3 times, most recently
from
a35ff4a to
f166406
Compare
|
If i run this QuickAccessComputerTest locally, with and without pr - in both cases test is passing. |
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
2 times, most recently
from
7163e82 to
87f55f9
Compare
|
If i run locally the ProgressContantsTest, all the tests are passing locally with and without the pr. |
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
from
87f55f9 to
24141e3
Compare
|
1 out of 3 runs failed: testBinaryContentTypeWithDescriberParallel (AllSearchTests AllFileSearchTests FileSearchTests) is known to be flaky. I have a look. |
Thanks for your input. |
deepika-u
force-pushed
the
deprecated_constants3
branch
from
24141e3 to
e04d3b4
Compare
4 participants
No description provided.