Fokko commented on code in PR #1365:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/pull/1365#discussion_r1880418065
##########
pyiceberg/catalog/__init__.py:
##########
@@ -631,9 +631,9 @@ def drop_view(self, identifier: Union[str, Identifier]) ->
None:
"""
@deprecated(
- deprecated_in="0.8.0",
- removed_in="0.9.0",
- help_message="Support for parsing catalog level identifier in Catalog
identifiers is deprecated. Please refer to the table using only its namespace
and its table name.",
+ deprecate_in="0.8.0",
+ remove_in="0.9.0",
+ topic="Please refer to the table using only its namespace and its
table name.",
Review Comment:
@ndrluis Sorry for not getting to this earlier. My main concern is that we
might make things more complex than necessary. Why would we not use the
`addendum` here? I find the `prefix` and `topic` not very intuitive, as in, it
is not directly obvious to me how the deprecation warning will look like. That
raises the question, should we reduce the number of options?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@iceberg.apache.org
