create(): remove return value

[frankenjoe]

Closes #173

This (officially) removes the return value from audbackend.create(). For legacy reasons we still return an instance of audbackend.interface.Versioned.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (232a140) 100.0% compared to head (71793a3) 100.0%.

Additional details and impacted files

| [Files](https://app.codecov.io/gh/audeering/audbackend/pull/174?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=audeering) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [audbackend/core/api.py](https://app.codecov.io/gh/audeering/audbackend/pull/174?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=audeering#diff-YXVkYmFja2VuZC9jb3JlL2FwaS5weQ==) | `100.0% <100.0%> (ø)` | | | [audbackend/core/conftest.py](https://app.codecov.io/gh/audeering/audbackend/pull/174?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=audeering#diff-YXVkYmFja2VuZC9jb3JlL2NvbmZ0ZXN0LnB5) | `100.0% <100.0%> (ø)` | |

[hagenw]

In the text of the docstring the BackendError is also discussed. I think we can remove the paragraph as it is repeated in the Raises section.

[frankenjoe]

In the text of the docstring the BackendError is also discussed. I think we can remove the paragraph as it is repeated in the Raises section.

Good point. Changed it also for access().

[hagenw]

Cool, thanks.

Should we maybe add a note to the docstring of audbackend.create() stating that it still returns an interface object. but that it will be removed in a future version. Or should we stay silent about it as it's also not that important?

[frankenjoe]

Should we maybe add a note to the docstring of audbackend.create() stating that it still returns an interface object. but that it will be removed in a future version. Or should we stay silent about it as it's also not that important?

Yes, I guess a note would not hurt. One problem is of course that we cannot show a deprecation warning, since we do not know when the user uses the returned value. So maybe we simply say it might be removed in a future version?

And one more thing I noticed. Lately we started to talk about "repository" instead of "backend object" (see description). To me it makes more sense since the common user will not directly interact with the backend object anyway and repository is probably more descriptive. But maybe we should unify it across all api functions. In available() we still talk about backend objects, for instance. Maybe something to keep in mind in #171.

[hagenw]

Yes, I also switched talking more about repository in #171 (but so far restricted to the usage section of the documentation).

I would simply write future version in the notes as it is not so easy to forsee the upcoming versions of audbackend ;)

[frankenjoe]

I added the following note: