... then we should NOT mark it to be deprecated. On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 12:27 PM Štefan Miklošovič <smikloso...@apache.org> wrote:
> I have a hard time getting used to the "terminology" here. If 2i indexes > are to be marked as deprecated and SAI is beta, then what is actually the > index implementation we stand behind in the production? It is like we are > "abandoning" the former but the latter is not bullet-proof yet. The signal > it sends is that we don't have a non-deprecated bullet-proof index impl. > > Maybe it is just about the wording and people are just fine running > deprecated things knowing they are production-ready, what I am used to is > that if something is deprecated, then there is always a replacement which > is recommended. If there isn't a recommended replacement which can fully > superseed the current implementation then we should mark it to be > deprecated. > > I understand that you are trying to find some "common ground" / expressing > that we are moving towards SAI but I am not sure the wording is entirely > correct or we should be careful how we frame it. > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 12:01 PM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > A possibility with SAI is to mark it beta while also marking 2i as >> > deprecated (and leaving SASI as marked). This sends a clear signal >> > (imho) that SAI is the recommended solution forward but also being >> > honest about its maturity and QA. >> >> >> (and leaving SASI as marked *experimental*) >> >
