-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.3k
[MVC] Remove obsolete APIs #7374
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
src/Mvc/src/Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Razor/Compilation/CompiledViewDescriptor.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/Mvc/src/Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Razor/Compilation/RazorViewAttribute.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
/// An <see cref="IApplicationFeatureProvider{TFeature}"/> for <see cref="ViewsFeature"/>. | ||
/// </summary> | ||
[Obsolete("This type is obsolete and will be removed in a future version. See " + nameof(IRazorCompiledItemProvider) + " for alternatives.")] | ||
public class ViewsFeatureProvider : IApplicationFeatureProvider<ViewsFeature> |
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.
For contrast, this is random old extensibility that is a good thing to remove since it will rarely appear in user-code.
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.
One concern I do have, is if I remove this but don't remove the RazorViewAttribute
and a user doesn't heed the obsolete warnings they'll get a hard to resolve, significant behavior change.
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.
and a user doesn't heed the obsolete warnings they'll get a hard to resolve
We can add it to the migration notes as something to be aware of. If we get lots of user feedback (I'd think it's fairly unlikely given this attribute comes from Precompilation), we can always change the runtime to throw.
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.
I'm still not convinced since i'd rather break hard or not at all then break soft when it comes to these things (can have migration guidance with either hard or soft breaks). I'll leave it as removed though since you both feel differently 😄
@danroth27 is there a place where we're collecting migration guidance?
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.
Once @rynowak's happy, I'm happy
ccf7d64
to
a452cf6
Compare
🆙 📅 |
- Removed ViewsFeatureProvider - Removed PageArgumentBinder and its internal implementation DefaultPageArgumentBinder. - Removed corresponding test classes/methods for all the above. - Reacted to class/member changes in dependencies. #7326
a452cf6
to
096f973
Compare
ping |
Addresses #7326