Skip to content
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

deprecate draft-2 & draft-3 #119

Closed
mr-c opened this issue Jul 8, 2016 · 11 comments
Closed

deprecate draft-2 & draft-3 #119

mr-c opened this issue Jul 8, 2016 · 11 comments
Assignees

Comments

@mr-c
Copy link
Member

mr-c commented Jul 8, 2016

No description provided.

@manu-chroma
Copy link
Member

This issue is probably related to excess content we have in cwltool/schemas/ directory or is there more to this one?

@mr-c
Copy link
Member Author

mr-c commented Aug 12, 2017

That and remove code branches that are specific to those draft versions, also rename draft2tool.py

@manu-chroma manu-chroma self-assigned this Aug 12, 2017
@manu-chroma
Copy link
Member

@mr-c any suggestions for renaming draft2tool.py

@mr-c
Copy link
Member Author

mr-c commented Aug 12, 2017

tool.py But include a draft2tool.py with a wildcard import of tool.py that also emits a warning

@manu-chroma
Copy link
Member

Since schemas/ is a git subtree, it doesn't make sense to remove draft-2 and draft-3 from that folder. Because they will be re-added in the next merge once again.

Is that correct assumption?

@mr-c
Copy link
Member Author

mr-c commented Aug 14, 2017

@manu-chroma That is a correct assumption, yes.

@manu-chroma
Copy link
Member

@mr-c In that case #520 looks ready to merge. Pls review.

@mr-c
Copy link
Member Author

mr-c commented Aug 14, 2017

@manu-chroma I've already nominated Peter Amstutz to review that PR :-)

@manu-chroma
Copy link
Member

That is a correct assumption, yes.

Any ideas for fixes? Related: common-workflow-language/common-workflow-language#413

@mr-c
Copy link
Member Author

mr-c commented Aug 14, 2017

@manu-chroma I'd leave the schemas directory alone, we will address that as part of the repository reorganization

@anton-khodak
Copy link
Member

Closed in #520

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants