10000 Drop application name as it has no real use case by goetas · Pull Request #933 · doctrine/migrations · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Drop application name as it has no real use case #933

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 25, 2020
Merged

Drop application name as it has no real use case #933

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 25, 2020

Conversation

goetas
Copy link
Member
@goetas goetas commented Feb 21, 2020 •
edited
Loading
Q A
Type rfc
BC Break -
Fixed issues -

Summary

currently the "application name" has no real propose and people (as I know...) always is set to some default. i suggest to simply remove it

@goetas goetas mentioned this pull request Feb 21, 2020
Merged
@goetas
Copy link
Member Author
goetas commented Feb 22, 2020

@alcaeus @greg0ire @SenseException what do you think about this?

@goetas goetas added this to the 3.0.0 milestone Feb 22, 2020
@SenseException
Copy link
Member

Judging by the diff it doesn't seem to have an impact on migrations when the application name is removed. Are there any changes needed for the documentation if this PR would get an okay?

@alcaeus
Copy link
Member
alcaeus commented Feb 25, 2020

what do you think about this?

No point keeping it around just to output it when a command is run. I'm ok with dropping it as long as we deprecate it first ;)
< 8000 form class="js-comment-update" id="issuecomment-590928492-edit-form" data-turbo="false" action="/doctrine/migrations/issue_comments/590928492" accept-charset="UTF-8" method="post">

@goetas
Copy link
Member Author
goetas commented Feb 25, 2020

Can someone approve it? (@alcaeus the forward compatibility chapter is still open for 2.x and would like to handle it once all the changes in 3.x are merged)

@greg0ire
Copy link
Member

What do you mean by "chapter"?

@goetas
Copy link
Member Author
goetas commented Feb 25, 2020

I mean that 3.x introduced BC breaks, and none of them have the deprecation layer in place for now inside the 2.x branch

greg0ire
greg0ire approved these changes Feb 25, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member
@greg0ire greg0ire left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As you wish, but bear in mind that writing the BC-layer can sometimes be the hardest part. I hope we are not going to end in a situation where it represents too much work and we have no upgrade path for our users.

@goetas goetas merged commit 1f054f9 into master Feb 25, 2020
@goetas goetas deleted the application-drop branch February 25, 2020 20:48
@goetas
Copy link
Member Author
goetas commented Feb 25, 2020

Will do my best with that. I think that not too many people have used doctrine/migrations as a library, but just as dependency

@goetas goetas mentioned this pull request Jun 21, 2020
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@greg0ire greg0ire greg0ire approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
BC Break
Projects
None yet
Milestone
3.0.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@goetas @SenseException @alcaeus @greg0ire
0