Updates 4 odd RPC commands to match other RPC commands which tend to follow a <VERB><OBJECT> naming scheme.
The old names still work as aliases of the new names, but don't show up in the help lists.
Normalize wallet RPC commands (refillkeypool, unlockwallet, lockwallet, setpassphrase) #1983
pull kjj2 wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from kjj2:rpcnormal changing 3 files +31 −27-
kjj2 commented at 1:56 AM on November 5, 2012: none
-
Normalize wallet RPC commands (refillkeypool, unlockwallet, lockwallet, setpassphrase) 4ba9b0603e
-
jgarzik commented at 6:04 PM on November 5, 2012: contributor
I like the old, deprecated names much better than the new ones ;p
-
Diapolo commented at 6:42 PM on November 5, 2012: none
IMHO, we should define, what deprecated means in that case and when it is considered safe to remove old naming conventions :). Perhaps add a date or version, when this is the case.
-
gavinandresen commented at 7:03 PM on November 5, 2012: contributor
ENOCARE/ACK.
(I don't really care, changes looks fine).
-
laanwj commented at 6:23 AM on November 6, 2012: member
Have we really arrived at the point that we deprecate commands (and thus break backwards compatibility) for aesthetic reasons?
This means we'll end up with duplicate commands for a long time, make it harder for people to google the commands. And communicating this to users is another problem, as we don't have an official API documentation to say "this will be deprecated in version XXX".
It's not worth the trouble.
-
Diapolo commented at 6:34 AM on November 6, 2012: none
I just wanted to ask :), your points indeed are clear and valid! As this pull renames without removing the old names that problem doesn't rise.
-
sipa commented at 9:49 AM on November 6, 2012: member
I think the only RPC makeover worth doing is a much more fundamental one, where we normalize commands, separate them clearly into modules (as already reflected in the source code... but who would now guess that gettransaction is a wallet RPC, and getrawtransaction a blockchain one?), normalize the data types used (amount as strings/satoshis/floats, difficulty as targethash/hexbits/float), perhaps add support for multiple wallets, make the error codes consistent, ...
That is much more work though, and probably means some RPC v2 mechanism like was already proposed before. About this... -ENOCARE
-
gavinandresen commented at 10:57 PM on November 10, 2012: contributor
@laanwj : "setaccount" used to be called "setlabel", so there is a precedent for breaking compatibility (after maintaing the old names for a while) just for aesthetic reasons.
-
jgarzik commented at 2:25 AM on November 16, 2012: contributor
Consensus seems to be "don't care / meh / not worth the trouble"... closing.
Perhaps put this on a list for a bigger RPC revamp, or right before RPC is locked in stone for version 1.0 (whenever that is).
- jgarzik closed this on Nov 16, 2012
- KolbyML referenced this in commit 18ee5cee1a on Dec 5, 2020
- KolbyML referenced this in commit 3156f92be2 on Dec 5, 2020
- KolbyML referenced this in commit 7c7f1bf916 on Dec 5, 2020
- DrahtBot locked this on Sep 8, 2021
