-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
chore(tcp): remove async_std support #5955
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.
Thanks. Left a couple of comments
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.
Can we not soft deprecate and just hard deprecate? CC @elenaf9 @dariusc93
@gitToki initially did that, but I asked for a soft deprecation. I think a soft deprecation makes sense here because we might still have users that use Any specific reason why you'd prefer a direct removal @jxs? |
Would there be any reason to suddenly do a hard deprecation vs soft? Imo, I think we should do a soft (though I am not against a hard one) to give users a time to switch or figure out plans on migration (or supporting the executor themselves for the respected protocols and utils). |
Hi!
the reason is more work, double the PR's for something that has been declared as unmaintained, I feel redundant to have a version for users to remove their usage when they probably are already removing, added to the fact that I have seen soft deprecations lost in time. |
updated, should be good. @dariusc93 please let me know if everything look good to you |
This pull request has merge conflicts. Could you please resolve them @gitToki? 🙏 |
This pull request has merge conflicts. Could you please resolve them @gitToki? 🙏 |
migrate from async-std to tokio, asked before [here](#5955 (comment)) Pull-Request: #6054.
dcutr and mplex fail but only the test have been updated so no version bump. It should be good now |
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.
Thanks for the patience Toki, left comments
This pull request has merge conflicts. Could you please resolve them @gitToki? 🙏 |
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.
This only needs to wait for #5959 to be merged, then we are good to go I think.
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.
Finally, thanks @gitToki for driving this
ref #5935
crate to update:
swarm, mDNS, and the transports TCP, QUIC and DNS.