From: "Diane Holt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > What is the motivation for this? > > To clean up old cruft. I just don't see > any need to keep including in the > documentation stuff that we don't want > people using anyway. (And besides which, > I have this tendency [okay, call it a > compulsion :)] to fix up any text that's > in front of me, so I end up reading and > editing old junk -- until it hits me that > I'm putting energy into something I don't > really need to be putting it into.)
If it has been more than 2 releases old, then +1 to chuck it away from documents. Otherwise, I would prefer they stay because a user transitioning, say, from Ant 1.4 to 1.6 should be able to see the deprecation warning before we pull it off altogether. Would this be acceptable as a document deprecation/removal process policy? > > Diane > Cheers, Magesh *********************************************** * Yawn: The only time some married men ever * * get to open their mouth. * *********************************************** -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
