Flot 0.6 Upgrade Breaking Change Question

[Peter Robinett]

Hello all,

Please tell me if you are using the lift-flot module. I am working on
upgrading it to Flot 0.6 and as Aaron noted[1], Flot has switched to a
slightly new format of specifying options. However, they have kept
backwards compatibility, meaning that we could upgrade to the latest
version of Flot without changing the way series options are specified.
Would you prefer to have a breaking change in lift-flot now in order
to ensure future compatibility or would you like to put off this
change until a future version of Flot drops support for this now
depreciated format?

Peter

[1]: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/a25a93f55c181475

[David Pollak]

On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Peter Robinett <pe...@bubblefoundry.com> wrote:

Hello all,

Please tell me if you are using the lift-flot module. I am working on
upgrading it to Flot 0.6 and as Aaron noted[1], Flot has switched to a
slightly new format of specifying options. However, they have kept
backwards compatibility, meaning that we could upgrade to the latest
version of Flot without changing the way series options are specified.
Would you prefer to have a breaking change in lift-flot now in order
to ensure future compatibility or would you like to put off this
change until a future version of Flot drops support for this now
depreciated format?

Can you deprecate the Scala calls that correspond to the deprecated Flot calls?  If so, that'd be optimal.  I'm not sure how widely used Flot is, but unless there are more than 3 people who object to a breaking change, I'd be okay with it.
 

Peter

[1]: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/a25a93f55c181475

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to lif...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.

--
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

[Peter Robinett]

It requires changing the FlotOptions trait. Actually, we could do
exactly what Flot 0.6 does and support both (just add the series
option without removing the lines, points and shadowSize options),
though then we'd need some way to prioritize one way over the other.

Peter

On Feb 5, 10:43 am, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Peter Robinett <pe...@bubblefoundry.com>wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
>
> > Please tell me if you are using the lift-flot module. I am working on
> > upgrading it to Flot 0.6 and as Aaron noted[1], Flot has switched to a
> > slightly new format of specifying options. However, they have kept
> > backwards compatibility, meaning that we could upgrade to the latest
> > version of Flot without changing the way series options are specified.
> > Would you prefer to have a breaking change in lift-flot now in order
> > to ensure future compatibility or would you like to put off this
> > change until a future version of Flot drops support for this now
> > depreciated format?
>
> Can you deprecate the Scala calls that correspond to the deprecated Flot
> calls?  If so, that'd be optimal.  I'm not sure how widely used Flot is, but
> unless there are more than 3 people who object to a breaking change, I'd be
> okay with it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Peter
>
> > [1]:

> >http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/a25a93f55...

>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Lift" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to lif...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com >

> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web frameworkhttp://liftweb.net

> Beginning Scalahttp://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890

[Aaron Valade]

Would we even need to prioritize it? If Flot supports both, we should
let it do the hard work of deciding which one to use if they are both
present, which I would imagine would be a very rare case. We can just
mark the old methods as deprecated and then remove them in the future
when Flot doesn't support the old way anymore.

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com.

[Peter Robinett]

True. Good solution.