Skip to content

Remove Static API code #3952

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

Closed
eerhardt opened this issue Jul 2, 2019 · 5 comments · Fixed by #4009
Closed

Remove Static API code #3952

eerhardt opened this issue Jul 2, 2019 · 5 comments · Fixed by #4009
Assignees
Labels
P1 Priority of the issue for triage purpose: Needs to be fixed soon.

Comments

@eerhardt
Copy link
Member

eerhardt commented Jul 2, 2019

Since we are closing Static API issues with "no development is being done on static API" (ex. #1153 (comment)), we should just remove the Static API code from the repo. If we need it again in the future, we can get it out of source control history. But there is no reason to build and maintain this code anymore.

@rauhs
Copy link
Contributor

rauhs commented Jul 3, 2019

I read those comments a few days ago and I had no clue it was discontinued. FWIW, we actually shipped this API. When was this decision done?

It would've been nice if Microsoft had communicated this to us developers as soon as it made this decision. Just a quick "Announcement" issue here on GitHub would've been enough.

@codemzs
Copy link
Member

codemzs commented Jul 3, 2019

We just did. Static API was always under preview. Thank you for your interest.

@codemzs codemzs added the P1 Priority of the issue for triage purpose: Needs to be fixed soon. label Jul 5, 2019
@artidoro
Copy link
Contributor

artidoro commented Jul 8, 2019

I plan to do the following:

  1. Internalize the Static API
  2. Migrate the tests that use the Static API to use the dynamic API
  3. Remove the Static API code from the code base

Thanks for the feedback @rauhs we will include this in the next ML.NET blog post and release notes to make sure it is communicated to the community.

@wschin
Copy link
Member

wschin commented Jul 8, 2019

@rauhs, this is very unfortunate and I personally like static APIs as well. However, we really don't have enough resource to maintain two sets of APIs and most people tend to user dynamic ones. We really appreciate your feedback. To prevernt it from happening again, all preview things should be marked with obsolete attribute to explicitly conduct a warning.

@codemzs
Copy link
Member

codemzs commented Jul 8, 2019

@rauhs The fact that API is preview is enough of a warning that it could change, or be removed, at any time. This is not a question of resource but principle, we need a good reason to maintain two sets of API doing the same thing. The feedback we got from customers was that static API was too complicated and we stopped development based on the very low demand. Hope this helps.

@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 21, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
P1 Priority of the issue for triage purpose: Needs to be fixed soon.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants