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

Enable strict explicit API mode #168

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 15, 2024
Merged

Enable strict explicit API mode #168

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 15, 2024

Conversation

qwwdfsad
Copy link
Collaborator

Rationale:

We know have quite a lot of accidentally public entities while both promoting and using BCV as a standalone JAR dependency. Apart from that, we have quite an unfortunate package name 'api' that might imply all these methods are part of public API (when, in fact, it's all related to API validation).

It would be nice to explicitly confine our visibilities and be more deliberate about that

@qwwdfsad qwwdfsad marked this pull request as draft January 12, 2024 15:52
Rationale:

We know have quite a lot of accidentally public entities while both promoting and using BCV as a standalone JAR dependency. Apart from that, we have quite an unfortunate package name 'api' that might imply all these methods are part of public API (when, in fact, it's all related to API validation).

It would be nice to explicitly confine our visibilities and be more deliberate about that
@qwwdfsad qwwdfsad marked this pull request as ready for review January 12, 2024 16:01
@qwwdfsad qwwdfsad merged commit 07d46e7 into master Jan 15, 2024
1 check passed
@qwwdfsad qwwdfsad deleted the explicit-api-mode branch January 15, 2024 09:58
shanshin pushed a commit to JetBrains/kotlin that referenced this pull request Oct 28, 2024
Rationale:

We now have quite a lot of accidentally public entities while both promoting and using BCV as a standalone JAR dependency. Apart from that, we have quite an unfortunate package name 'api' that might imply all these methods are part of public API (when, in fact, it's all related to API validation).

It would be nice to explicitly confine our visibilities and be more deliberate about that
Pull request Kotlin/binary-compatibility-validator#168
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants