Skip to content

Remove mention of broken YAML subdocument profile negation #11378

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

shakuzen
Copy link
Member

Documenting this feature misleads users into thinking it should work. The documentation can be added back once gh-8011 is fixed.

Documenting this feature misleads users into thinking it should work. The documentation can be added back once spring-projectsgh-8011 is fixed.
@spring-projects-issues spring-projects-issues added the status: waiting-for-triage An issue we've not yet triaged label Dec 19, 2017
@snicoll
Copy link
Member

snicoll commented Dec 28, 2017

@shakuzen I think I lost you as why that section of the doc is linked to #8011

@snicoll snicoll added the status: waiting-for-feedback We need additional information before we can continue label Dec 28, 2017
@shakuzen
Copy link
Member Author

The removed section of the doc is the only description of negated profiles. Negated profiles are what is reported as not working in #8011 (with repro project and test linked in the issue description). I'm not sure if negated profiles ever worked. The unit tests for SpringProfileDocumentMatcher pass but I haven't been able to actually get negated profiles to work as described in any project or integration test.

@wilkinsona
Copy link
Member

wilkinsona commented Jan 2, 2018

Support for profile negation was introduced in 1.4. That would suggest one of the following:

  1. It's really broken and no one's using it.
  2. It largely works other than the problem described in SpringProfileDocumentMatcher does not work as expected #8011.

I think that 2 is the more likely, particularly as it was a contribution and, presumably, it works for @mbenson's original use case at least. Rather than just removing the documentation I'd prefer to either fix #8011 or to remove the functionality altogether.

@mbenson
Copy link
Contributor

mbenson commented Jan 3, 2018

I'm still ready to participate in a solution for #8011. Recall that I had some code working there last year that hopefully would at least be a starting point.

@wilkinsona wilkinsona added status: declined A suggestion or change that we don't feel we should currently apply and removed status: waiting-for-feedback We need additional information before we can continue status: waiting-for-triage An issue we've not yet triaged labels Jan 10, 2018
@wilkinsona
Copy link
Member

We've agreed that just removing the documentation isn't the right approach. We'll try to get to #8011 before 2.0 GAs.

@wilkinsona wilkinsona closed this Jan 10, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status: declined A suggestion or change that we don't feel we should currently apply
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants