Skip to content

Conversation

ryankert01
Copy link
Contributor

What is this PR for?

as discussed at YUNIKORN-2207.
should be done after 1.6 release.

What type of PR is it?

  • - Bug Fix
  • - Improvement
  • - Feature
  • - Documentation
  • - Hot Fix
  • - Refactoring

Todos

  • - Task

What is the Jira issue?

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YUNIKORN-2634

How should this be tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate)

Questions:

  • - The licenses files need update.
  • - There is breaking changes for older versions.
  • - It needs documentation.

Copy link
Contributor

@wilfred-s wilfred-s left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM +1

@chenyulin0719
Copy link
Contributor

@wilfred-s , @craigcondit We didn't make deprecation announcement for yunikorn.apache.org/username in 1.6.0 . Should we postpone this change to next release?

@ryankert01
Copy link
Contributor Author

ryankert01 commented Jan 4, 2025

Hi, @chenyulin0719. Maybe I should mark it as deprecated for now(rather than legacy)? (:

@chenyulin0719
Copy link
Contributor

chenyulin0719 commented Jan 5, 2025

I think we haven't discussed whether to deprecate the legacy label yunikorn.apache.org/username.
For back compatibility, I prefer keep it as legacy. If we are going to deprecate the legacy label. I think a notification to user channel is required.

Need more feedback from other users/contributors.

@craigcondit
Copy link
Contributor

I think we haven't discussed whether to deprecate the legacy label yunikorn.apache.org/username. For back compatibility, I prefer keep it as legacy. If we are going to deprecate the legacy label. I think a notification to user channel is required.

We should certainly deprecate it. We should probably document that as part of the 1.7.0 release notes and remove in 1.8.0.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants