On May 5, 2008, at 10:39 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
To me, that sounded like you were going to change the behavior rather than just mark the method as @deprecated.
I was planning to do both. Although we may decide to be gentle about it and deprecate the method, but preserve the functionality (which will put a bit of extra maintenance burden on us).
I am leaning towards the first option (deprecate and stop invoking), especially since the nature of the change results in enhanced data consistency, so there won't be any unpleasant surprises.
Andrus
