Methon breaking changes in release and make this package vue2compatable

[Mister-Hope]

It has been 3 days after I commented in #62.
In my option, there should fewer breaking change. We should not start a breaking change as long as we can solve it, not open as much changes as we can. For examaple the name and components options , will probably inherited from vue 2, while now this package force us to hack it.

I really you should consider it carefully. Some users like me couldn't afford hacking and rehacking again and again while releasing new version.

[posva]

It has been 3 days after I commented in #62.

While I understand your frustration, this doesn't give you the right to open an issue with this tone and drop all your frustration on the author of the lib (which I am not, I haven't even pushed to this repo).

A more appropriate way would have been to list specific breaking changes so anyone can work on fixing them. We will gladly accept a new issue with a more appropriate tone and listing the breaking changes that shouldn't have happened

[Mister-Hope]

I have methoned it in my issue:

The name and components options , will probably inherited from vue 2, while now this package force us to hack it.

while you don't see it.

That 's now where the problem is.

I do understand your work, while thoughn I was complaining about rewriting my files over and over again, but my point is stop making break changes which the RFC does not methoned. Just remain as the vue2 do, instead of changing into a new style or let us hack it. Among the people who are using this package , maybe some just wanna try vue3 style, but I think there are amount of people like me just want to be fimilar to vue3, and we are trying to prepare to move on to vue3. Just as its doc says(or used to say)(I didn't find the words just then): Just change the vue-function-api into vue. And we can move to vue3.

But while you upgraded it and I wrote with ts along with it, I rewrote all my components 4 times in order to clear the error I triggered after update. I WAS talking about vue2 compatable when the RFC and Evan You did not specific how to write in vue3.

[Mister-Hope]

I do think that you CAN understand what changes is non-RFC mentioned and non-vue2 compatable.
That is all my opinion.

If you want, I can start a new issue listing all the non-RFC mentioned and non-vue2 compatable changes, but I don't think that is nessary, and I also think that let the people who already swithed to roll back is not a good idea. So please just stop breaking any more now, if only it is nessary.

[liximomo]

Sorry for that. We should warn the unstable status of vue-function-api. I think some beta releases would be necessary. We do consider our users.

[pangao66]

同样遇到这个问题,升级之后用ts发现 createComponent里面 只能写setup, 组件的其他属性,name,componets之类的都会报ts类型错误,这跟vue3目前公布的rfcs是违背的

[beeplin]

@pangao66 my workaround is to add // @ts-ignore before name.

Or please wait for bugfixes before updating to the current unstable version.

[Mister-Hope]

Beta release will be fine. And I think the types file should be improved.

[donnysim]

But the v3 is only in rfc and this package is in early development, you using this package is already accepting that there will be breaking changes until it settles down. There's no reason to go ham just because you can't wait for it to become stable. While i would prefer it used <1 versioning until it's stable, it is what it is.

[Mister-Hope]

But the v3 is only in rfc and this package is in early development, you using this package is already accepting that there will be breaking changes until it settles down. There's no reason to go ham just because you can't wait for it to become stable. While i would prefer it used <1 versioning until it's stable, it is what it is.

Yes, I understand that, but i think breaking changes though a secend bit version should be list on the release panel. I did not get any warning for caution updating it. And any breaking change obeys vue2compatable should at least be discussed with others.

Besides, in my opinion, it's ok for the bugs in new version, as long as the author is active dealing with it, but I think breaking changes without being methoned is not good.