Agreed.
Actually, in the development versions only, I think we could remove
it in the release immediately after the first one that implements the
replacement. I'd be fairly accommodating for back-comp. in stable
versions, but in the dev versions, I think we should maximize our
freedom to make progress.
On Mar 7, 2007, at 2:09 PM, Mark de Wever wrote:
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 07:47:36PM +0100, Nils Kneuper wrote:
Hi everyone!
We should really start removing WML that is only left for
compatibility
to 1.0.x.
In general we should be a little more strict with depricated WML. At
least we should show a depricated message. Within 3 releases after
WML
in some area was changed and old one was declared depricated we
should
remove this compatibility. That means if WML (like the new terrain
WML)
did change in version 1.3.1, we should remove the compatibility to
this
old version three (or maybe two) versions later. In this case when
doing
it three versions later, version 1.3.4 would not support the single
letter WML anymore. Of course with this all rcs and stable
versions just
count as "one" version since we should not change the accepted WML
syntax within these versions.
In general we should be a lot stricter about depricated WML and
removing
compatibility layers since they might clutter parts of the
sourcecode.
Comments about this?
One word; agreed!
Greets,
Nils Kneuper aka Ivanovic
Mark de Wever aka Mordante/SkeletonCrew
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
