On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/12/31 Levente Uzonyi <[email protected]>:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Igor Stasenko wrote:
ahahaa.. you guys are killing me..
You are taking things too serious.
Yeah.. i would be gladly hear from Levente, what is 'the proper
deprecation policy'.
But since nobody described it, we are doomed to use one, invented before
:)
I described my ideas here, so I won't repeat it. But I can tell you that
removing a method which wasn't deprecated at all is _not_ a proper
deprecation policy.
can you give a pointer, where i can read about it?
You can search this mailing list. But to make it a bit easier, it's
basically the same as what it's intended to be:
- deprecate all non-private methods that are to be removed (some private
methods should also be deprecated)
- keep the deprecated methods for at least one new release
- calculate the deprecation dates from the method timestamps
Nothing is perfect, but its not the reason to fight.
There's no fight.
uh okay.. whatever you call it :)
...
Levente
Levente
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
