> -----Original Message----- > From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > deprecation does not imply that we are removing the > > functionality. Just that > > it is unsafe, unsupported whatever or perhaps we just prefer you > > write build > > files like this rather than that. > > I have to disagree. Deprecation is an indication that a > feature is going to be removed and its future use is not > supported. Further it is, IMHO, a warning of a small backward > compatability break in a controlled fashion. > > If we could never remove such features, then why bother > deprecating at all? Is it just to make the build output ugly? > An example below from Tomcat build. Why do we make the users > who do bother to upgrade continually jump through hoops > changing attribute names to avoid warnings? Is it just > because *we* feel "file" is better than "jarfile"? How > conceited we are then!
> So, if we are not going to remove deprecated features, I > would vote that we remove deprecation warnings. They are useless. eheh..good point indeed. What's the point of marking things as 'deprecated' if we don't want to do anything about it but wait for a major release to break everything... Ok. Looks like we are stuck here. There will be a -1 to remove deprecated stuff. And I would gladly vote -1 on removing the 'deprecation' because I feel we are encouraging code bloat and don't give a damn about the 'end-user' API. :-) Stephane -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
