This feels wrong. Why do we need all of this? Specifically the ReplaceWith won't work as you're replacing with the same string

Ah, I see it now. I was overlooking it, added these annotations for backwards compatibility based on other examples in the codebase when trying to fix some issues post-migration for ReactHorizontalScrollContainerLegacyView in old arch but just double checked and indeed are not needed. Thanks for pointing this out

This is probably an indicator of a breaking change. We should check how often ReactClippingViewGroup is implemented in OSS. If the number is relevant this will have to be marked as [BREAKING] rather than internal.

If there are no relevant usages on the other hand, we can make this class [INTERNAL]

I see some usages in OSS (ref), so it would be a breaking change indeed.

Now, my memory started getting back to why I added the backwards compatibility annotations: seems like we can prevent this from being a breaking change by adding the following (tested by reverting the changes in ReactHorizontalScrollContainerLegacyView):

@Suppress("INAPPLICABLE_JVM_NAME")
@set:JvmName("setRemoveClippedSubviews")
public var removeClippedSubviews: Boolean

But in the other hand, I don't see any other cases where we have done this in the codebase. Do we prefer to have it as a breaking change?

So we need to look only at Kotlin usages here

and here

I believe the latter as just forks, so we can consider this actually [INTERNAL]

Ohh, understood. Seems good then, thank you for double checking!