Futures Position Risk backward compatibility #659
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Hi @lyro41 , thank you for your valuable suggestion! I completely agree with you; we should keep v2 unchanged and add the v3 structs. |
adshao
approved these changes
Jan 27, 2025
|
cc @xyq-c-cpp |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In my opinion, we shouldn't make breaking changes and replace v2 endpoints with v3 ones in terms of backward compatibility.
This repository has 1.6k stars and almost 700 forks, and suddenly changing "Position Risk Service" from v2 behavior to v3 shouldn't be allowed, as you make breaking changes out of the blue in lots of other repositories.
Especially, given that package is v2 library, if you add v3 endpoints in replacement of v2 ones (which are not deprecated), it makes usage of the package kind of confusing as well.
Another point is that there are several v2 endpoints that have v3 versions (e.g. Position Risk, Account, Balance), which were not updated yet. In the future, I would suggest to introduce them like "AccountServiceV3", not "AccountService".