Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 16. Januar 2006 13:08:31 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll just note that:
- I agree with your point about deprecation warnings. IOW
we should not check in new deprecation warnings on the trunk
that cause warnings to be output when running the standard tests.
We should correct any code that needs to be updated first.
(Personally, I add the deprecation warning, making sure that I
get the expected warnings, and then I make the warnings go away.)
But you can only correct code when you have a reasonable replacement. In
case we should use my current ZPT replacement based on the Z3
implementation we would deprecate lib/python/TALES and have deprecation
warnings for two major releases. But we can't replace lib/python/TALES
with the Z3 tal|tales
packages since we can expect incompatibilities which are not acceptable
for backward compatibility issues. One could write fascades for such
modules (Philipp already wrote one for STX) but I doubt that they will
be 100% compatible. I would prefer to keep such modules in place and to
just remove them after the deprecation period.
There are two separate issues here:
1. ZPT backward compatibility.
Are we introdcuting ZPT backward incompatibilities? (Aside from module
paths)? If so, then I think we need to have a proposal. (Maybe you already
made one and I wasn't paying attention. I don't see one at:
2. If we decide to change something, even if it's backward incompatible,
we need to change Zope itself to do things the new way before we expect
other people to and before we introduce the deprecation warning.
If there isn't a valid new way of doing something, then we can't deprecate
the old way.
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -