On 20 March 2017 at 20:55, Marc Mutz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday 20 March 2017 19:11:47 Ville Voutilainen wrote: >> However, I think it's still better to >> keep the name in the APIs and change >> the meaning of the name. That's far from ideal, but it still provides >> a better compatibility story than >> eradicating the name from APIs, and we can still take reasonable steps >> towards eventually eradicating >> the name. > > You want to keep the name used in the API to eventually eradicate the name? > Can you explain how the first helps with the latter?
By changing the implementation under that name and turning the name into an alias, encouraging users to migrate from that name to the name of the real facility, deprecating the legacy name, and then eventually removing the legacy name; in that order. I suppose others have described plans to some extent similar. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
