I would recommend announcing the removal BEFORE the actual removal.
Give a clear indication of what is required to upgrade old but working
code to new and working code. Remember that the the user's code is NOT
wrong and that the change being made is a nicety and NOT a bug.
Introducing BC breaks are always going to cause headaches for users
("It worked last week and when I upgraded the library it didn't work
any more - can you help me fix it?" - sort of thing).
On 14/02/07, Mislav Marohnić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/14/07, Thomas Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > For stuff like this, we'd need some way of marking things as deprecated,
> giving a warning that it "will be removed in next major version".
>
> I don't think it's necessary to go the Rails way with this. Simply writing
> the blog post about deprecated stuff for versions 1.6 - 2.0 and repeating
> those notices when actually releasing seems enough.
>
> $("foo").toggle is nicer (and more encouraged!), anyway. How hard will it be
> to replace? And if people really want to update fast without fixing their
> old code at the moment, we could provide a backwards-compatibility addon
> with this code we removed.
>
>
> >
>
--
-----
Richard Quadling
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
