Todd Baert
Todd Baert
I'll take this over if you don't mind @aepfli
This is a good idea, I think. We can change the provider interface in a breaking way without violating our contract because, as @sahidvelji says, it's not a breaking change......
I think a 2.0 is a good idea, generally. I just realized though that [shutdown is still experimental](https://openfeature.dev/specification/sections/flag-evaluation#16-shutdown), so I'm in favor of just doing the breaking changes you describe...
hmmm.... that's definitely more of a breaking change. What do you think @sahidvelji ? Should we just "bite the bullet" and release a 2.0? I'm interested in your perspective. One...
> While we do need to keep the v1 code around, we do not need to support v1 indefinitely. Once v2 is released, we would deprecate v1 and support it...
@UtkarshSharma2612 you might like this.
Should we as part of this issue also ensure the RPC stream logs similarly?
I am going to release this since it contains really no functional changes, only performance and debugging improvements. We may have a release soon with a new multi-provider implementation, and...
/gemini review
I'll merge this one tomorrow @chrfwow . Up to you if you want to address the minor Gemini issues.