I'm in favor of anything smoothing migration. Ideally I would love to have refactorings recorded.
Stef > Guys, > > So yesterday I deployed a new server based on an #20309 image, with a single > Metacello config for my code, and a separate manual load for Seaside 3.1 > (which I use as an interface to work with the headless image) - and all went > well ! > > But I had to apply one manual hack: remove the deprecation from > #includesSubString: (for Seaside). > > I feel like we need another, more silent kind of deprecation for situations > like this. Library/framework/application writers targetting multiple Pharo > versions are being hit way too hard by this, for - in this case certainly -, > no good reason. Creating two versions (I introduced a special package > Pharo-Forward-Compatibility just for this), is not worth it (unless you > absolutely want the best Pharo 2.x code like I do). > > I would imagine something similar to Deprecation which maybe prints on the > Transcript, but is otherwise silent, except when some switch is turned on. > > It would give us the power to deprecate much more things even 'silly > renames'. And less external stuff would break. > > What do you think ? > > Sven > > -- > Sven Van Caekenberghe > http://stfx.eu > Smalltalk is the Red Pill > > > >
