Joe Schaefer wrote:
Joe Orton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:43:22AM -0500, Joe Schaefer wrote:
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
One needs to go through a deprecation cycle before any backwards
compatibility in the same generation of the project can be dropped.
Heh, a search for "deprecation cycle" on marc's [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives
comes up empty.
I'm not sure really what you expect. That no API changes can be made
during 2.1 development unless they were predicted ahead of time by N
years and marked with a red dot?
I think what Stas was expecting something similar to the perl5
versioning rules: misfeatures that occur minor version $X (X even)
cannot be removed until $X+4, and must first be marked deprecated
in $X+2. I'm just pointing out that [EMAIL PROTECTED] has never discussed
doing something like that, so Stas is mistaken if he's expecting
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to follow such rules.
Mea culpa
Not that I think it'd be a bad thing though, because it would
provide specific guidance about when to bump the minor number.
But I won't be lobbying for this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] any time soon :-)
Amen.
--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
