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

Remove the legacy_api #1230

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 16, 2018
Merged

Remove the legacy_api #1230

merged 2 commits into from
Jul 16, 2018

Conversation

brasmusson
Copy link
Contributor

@brasmusson brasmusson commented Oct 29, 2017

Summary

Remove the legacy_api.

Details

As soon as all formatter have been re-written to use the new formatter api (see #839), the legacy_api should be removed.

Closes #839.

Motivation and Context

The legacy_api was only intended as a short term fix in v2.0.0.

How Has This Been Tested?

Types of changes

  • Refactor (code change that does not change external functionality)
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

Checklist:

  • I've added tests for my code
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

@mattwynne
Copy link
Member

\o/

@brasmusson how about we set the master branch to target v4.0.0 and try and just rip out all this old code, including the pretty/html formatters, then rebuild from there?

My only concern is that there may be quite a few scenarios that depend on the pretty formatter, though I could be wrong.

@brasmusson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Around half of the scenarios fail when the pretty and html formatters do not work. A bit less than half if the default formatter is changed to progress, otherwise more than half (137 out of 210) of the scenarios fails. So yes, a lot of our feature files depends on the pretty formatter.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jan 1, 2018

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in a week if no further activity occurs.

@stale stale bot added the ⌛ stale Will soon be closed by stalebot unless there is activity label Jan 1, 2018
@brasmusson brasmusson added the 🧷 pinned Tells Stalebot not to close this issue label Jan 1, 2018
@stale stale bot removed the ⌛ stale Will soon be closed by stalebot unless there is activity label Jan 1, 2018
@olleolleolle
Copy link
Contributor

I’m interested in this being open.

@brasmusson brasmusson merged commit f0ef47d into master Jul 16, 2018
@brasmusson brasmusson deleted the remove-legacy-api branch July 16, 2018 11:37
@mattwynne
Copy link
Member

💖 hooray!

@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented Jul 17, 2019

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 17, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
🧷 pinned Tells Stalebot not to close this issue
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Re-write formatters against new API
4 participants