I get it...we are talking about the APIs already marked Obsolete in 2.x. Good idea to remove them now then, Diego.
On Aug 11, 4:32 pm, "Frans Bouma" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I prefer to do this type of cleanup *after* a release...this gives plenty > of > > time to find out if something important has been removed by mistake :) > > That's a little odd, considering that you then change an API after > it's been finalized by an RTM. I don't know if the methods are marked with > 'true' for the parameter in ObsoleteAttribute to signal a compiler error, if > not, you _will_ have people using these methods, no matter what the > attribute says. Making it a 'breaking change' for a final release means > people have to deal with it before they upgrade to 3.0, and not some time > after they've upgraded. > > FB > > > > > > > IMO The main focus should be getting 3.0.0 as stable as possible. > > > Having said that, now is better than never... :) > > > On Aug 11, 1:42 am, Diego Mijelshon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Are there any plans to remove members that were obsolete in 2.x? > > > > I can create a patch, if it's any help. > > > > I know the priority is sub-zero, but obsolete cleanup is one of those > > > things you can only do in major releases. > > > > Diego
