[MrNK2107]

Issue number: closes #8574

Summary

Changes

CachePersistenceLayer, CacheConnection and CacheClientProtocol were TypeAliases of the deprecated Redis* classes, so they were the same object and @deprecated fired for both.

• The implementation now lives under the Cache* names, without the decorator.
• RedisCachePersistenceLayer, RedisConnection and RedisClientProtocol are thin @deprecated subclasses of them. Only the old names warn, and they still work anywhere a Cache* object is expected.
• CachePersistenceLayer.__init__ builds a CacheConnection instead of a RedisConnection, so the new name no longer triggers the warning internally.
• Fixed the RedisClientProtocol warning text, which named RedisPersistenceLayer / CacheProtocol.

I kept the implementation in redis.py rather than moving it into cache.py as the issue suggests. That keeps the diff small, keeps existing mock.patch("...persistence.redis.redis") targets working, and avoids conflicting with #8606, which edits the same methods. Happy to do the full move if you prefer.

One behaviour note: isinstance(CachePersistenceLayer(...), RedisCachePersistenceLayer) is now False, because the old name is the subclass. The reverse, isinstance(RedisCachePersistenceLayer(...), CachePersistenceLayer), is True.

Tests: new functional tests check that the Cache* names emit no DeprecationWarning, and that the Redis* names still warn with the right message and are instances of the Cache* classes. All idempotency tests pass.

User experience

Before:

CachePersistenceLayer(client=redis_client)
# DeprecationWarning: RedisCachePersistenceLayer will be removed in v4.0.0. Please use CachePersistenceLayer instead.

After: CachePersistenceLayer, CacheConnection and CacheClientProtocol no longer warn. RedisCachePersistenceLayer(...) still warns as before.

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[leandrodamascena]

Thanks @MrNK2107! I ran the suite with -W always: the Cache* names are silent, the Redis* names still warn with the corrected text, and the old class still works end to end with custom attribute names. Keeping the implementation in redis.py was the right call for the mock targets, and I test-merged this with #8606 on the same file, no conflicts. The isinstance note is fair and the only thing anyone could notice.

Approving now. This goes out in 3.38.0, so it will sit here a bit before I merge. No need to rebase or touch anything, I'll take care of it and you'll get the credit in the release notes. Thank you!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 96.93%. Comparing base (0f64f28) to head (acbea71).
⚠️ Report is 13 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #8625   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    96.93%   96.93%           
========================================
  Files          318      318           
  Lines        16031    16031           
  Branches      1423     1426    +3     
========================================
  Hits         15540    15540           
  Misses         349      349           
  Partials       142      142           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.