Daniel Shahaf wrote on Tue, 05 Sep 2017 14:06 +0000: > Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, 05 Sep 2017 15:56 +0200: > > On 05.09.2017 15:45, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > > br...@apache.org wrote on Tue, 05 Sep 2017 07:45 +0000: > > >> +svn_client_upgrade2(const char *wcroot_dir, > > >> + const char* wc_format_version, > > >> + svn_client_ctx_t *ctx, > > >> + apr_pool_t *scratch_pool); > > >> + > > >> +/** > > >> + * Like svn_client_upgrade2(), but always upgrades to the newest > > >> + * supported format. > > >> + * > > >> - * @since New in 1.7. > > >> + * @deprecated Provided for backward compatibility with the 1.7 API. > > > Why drop @since? We don't usually remove @since tags when deprecating. > > > (Both here and in svn_wc_upgrade()) > > > > Yes we do. I looked around and didn't find @since and @deprecated used > > together. > > Counter-examples: svn_cmdline_prompt_baton_t, > svn_cmdline_create_auth_baton(), svn_txdelta_to_svndiff2(). > > Functions that have @deprecated but not @since are, the way we've usually > managed deprecations, supposed to be functions that were present in 1.0. > (Example: svn_txdelta_to_svndiff()) > > > The deprecation reason gives the original API version anyway. > > > > This is just a coincidence. We could very well have "@since New in 1.1" > together with "@deprecated ... for ... the 1.9 API." if we deprecate > some old function.
This example is for a function that was added in 1.1.0 and first became deprecated in 1.10.0. Accordingly, the @deprecated annotation on svn_client_upgrade() should say 1.9, not 1.7. Cheers, Daniel
