-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.8k
[Debug] Deprecate ExceptionHandler::createResponse #15418
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
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
deprecating a private method looks weird. You should describe what is deprecated exactly
|
Or could I drop this method in 2.7? The comments in #5367 make me think that the answer could be yes. |
134ff15 to
e287a6b
Compare
e505e1e to
1bb4f44
Compare
1bb4f44 to
dfe0356
Compare
|
PR is ready but is to be merged after #15417 (which is included for now) |
a0dfe87 to
1782bfd
Compare
|
Ok, can you rebase then? |
1782bfd to
a4d2d31
Compare
|
Rebased |
|
Thank you @nicolas-grekas. |
…colas-grekas) This PR was merged into the 2.8 branch. Discussion ---------- [Debug] Deprecate ExceptionHandler::createResponse | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | no | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | yes | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | #15414 | License | MIT | Doc PR | - This does deprecate a behavior that might be specialized by someone somewhere, but I seriously doubt anyone did. It complicated the implementation for no gain IMHO. Commits ------- a4d2d31 [Debug] Deprecate ExceptionHandler::createResponse
This PR was merged into the 3.0-dev branch. Discussion ---------- [Debug] remove unused use statement | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | no | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | - | License | MIT | Doc PR | - ref #15418 Commits ------- a862e5e [Debug] remove unused use statement
This does deprecate a behavior that might be specialized by someone somewhere, but I seriously doubt anyone did. It complicated the implementation for no gain IMHO.