On 10 Mar 2015, at 22:02, Vasiliki Kalavri <vasilikikala...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > > I would like your opinion on whether we should deprecate the Spargel API in > 0.9. > > Gelly doesn't depend on Spargel, it actually contains it -- we have copied > the relevant classes over. I think it would be a good idea to deprecate > Spargel in 0.9, so that we can inform existing Spargel users that we'll > eventually remove it. +1. I think it's OK as we want all Graph API users to go against Gelly in the future. I don't even think that many people are using Spargel as we never really promoted it heavily. > Also, I think the fact that we have 2 Graph APIs in the documentation might > be a bit confusing for newcomers. One might wonder why do we have them both > and when shall they use one over the other? > > It might be a good idea to add a note in the Spargel guide that would > suggest to use Gelly instead and a corresponding note in the beginning of > the Gelly guide to explain that Spargel is part of Gelly now. Or maybe a > "Gelly or Spargel?" section. What do you think? +1, but I wouldn't hint to that prominently in the beginning. I think a section about Spargel at the end, where you explain that it was our initial take at graph processing and a link the respective (old) docs should be fine for people who have already used it.
