> > >> >> Hmm. While I agree in principle that maintaining unused APIs is a burden, >> our compatibility promises are quite strict. Removing a 1.0 API, even if it >> was deprecated in 1.1, is a no-go. I'd prefer if we could come up with a >> way, even if only in maintainer mode, to verify that the backwards >> compatibility shims are up to date. >> >> > I agree. But what about throwing a "not implemented" error instead? Is it > still breaking backward compatibility or it could actually be a way to go? > > > > Yes, I think we're allowed to do this after 22 years. > > > Committed in r1938248.
Thanks! -- Timofei Zhakov
