highperfocused/bitcoin
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git synced 2025-12-18 16:42:54 +01:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32867: doc: mention key removal in rpc interface modification

Browse Source 
944e5ff848 doc: mention key removal in rpc interface modification (rkrux)

Pull request description:

  A discussion in a previous PR 32618 prompted me to add this note: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32618#discussion_r2181951390

  <!--
  *** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

  Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
  immediately.

  GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
  https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
  first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
  -->

  <!--
  Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
  Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
  significantly:

  * Any test improvements or new tests that improve coverage are always welcome.
  * All other changes should have accompanying unit tests (see `src/test/`) or
    functional tests (see `test/`). Contributors should note which tests cover
    modified code. If no tests exist for a region of modified code, new tests
    should accompany the change.
  * Bug fixes are most welcome when they come with steps to reproduce or an
    explanation of the potential issue as well as reasoning for the way the bug
    was fixed.
  * Features are welcome, but might be rejected due to design or scope issues.
    If a feature is based on a lot of dependencies, contributors should first
    consider building the system outside of Bitcoin Core, if possible.
  * Refactoring changes are only accepted if they are required for a feature or
    bug fix or otherwise improve developer experience significantly. For example,
    most "code style" refactoring changes require a thorough explanation why they
    are useful, what downsides they have and why they *significantly* improve
    developer experience or avoid serious programming bugs. Note that code style
    is often a subjective matter. Unless they are explicitly mentioned to be
    preferred in the [developer notes](/doc/developer-notes.md), stylistic code
    changes are usually rejected.
  -->

  <!--
  Bitcoin Core has a thorough review process and even the most trivial change
  needs to pass a lot of eyes and requires non-zero or even substantial time
  effort to review. There is a huge lack of active reviewers on the project, so
  patches often sit for a long time.
  -->

ACKs for top commit:
  maflcko:
    lgtm ACK 944e5ff848
  stickies-v:
    ACK 944e5ff848
  glozow:
    lgtm ACK 944e5ff848

Tree-SHA512: f64c086c99e7c73a3ae7d60b2e8e06c8e7a3a49305a66d5c5a96db9b4ebbd01928ab5ccbcbdac26f400d16662f84469c448625e1f55ec2a9a920eff8a05fc379
This commit is contained in:
merge-script
2025-10-28 11:45:19 -04:00
parent 24434c1284 944e5ff848
commit de15e52f09
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
doc/developer-notes.md
View File

@@ -1363,7 +1363,7 @@ A few guidelines for introducing and reviewing new RPC interfaces:
A few guidelines for modifying existing RPC interfaces:
- It's preferable to avoid changing an RPC in a backward-incompatible manner, but in that case, add an associated `-deprecatedrpc=` option to retain previous RPC behavior during the deprecation period. Backward-incompatible changes include: data type changes (e.g. from `{"warnings":""}` to `{"warnings":[]}`, changing a value from a string to a number, etc.), logical meaning changes of a value, or key name changes (e.g. `{"warning":""}` to `{"warnings":""}`). Adding a key to an object is generally considered backward-compatible. Include a release note that refers the user to the RPC help for details of feature deprecation and re-enabling previous behavior. [Example RPC help](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/94f0adcc/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1316-L1323).
- It's preferable to avoid changing an RPC in a backward-incompatible manner, but in that case, add an associated `-deprecatedrpc=` option to retain previous RPC behavior during the deprecation period. Backward-incompatible changes include: data type changes (e.g. from `{"warnings":""}` to `{"warnings":[]}`, changing a value from a string to a number, etc.), logical meaning changes of a value, key name changes (e.g. `{"warning":""}` to `{"warnings":""}`), or removing a key from an object. Adding a key to an object is generally considered backward-compatible. Include a release note that refers the user to the RPC help for details of feature deprecation and re-enabling previous behavior. [Example RPC help](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/94f0adcc/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L1316-L1323).
- *Rationale*: Changes in RPC JSON structure can break downstream application compatibility. Implementation of `deprecatedrpc` provides a grace period for downstream applications to migrate. Release notes provide notification to downstream users.