On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 12:57 -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 12:55 -0500, James Bowes wrote: > > Jeremy Katz wrote: > > >> Lastly, how about marking the existing do* methods as deprecated? :) > > > Well, they have to exist in some form or another -- direct calls of them > > > probably won't be needed in The Future (tm), but the _getter will still > > > need to call them. > > > > Oh, I should have finished the thought: mark them as deprecated, and > > eventually replace them with _ versions. > > That sounds like it's just crazy enough to work! > > But yeah, with that, seems reasonable. Arguably we could go ahead and > do the move when marking them as deprecated.
okay then I'll commit what I have, clean up the things y'all suggested. Then the next things are: 1. rename the methods 2. put the deprecation warnings in place 3. go and add these in for comps and up, too. 4. profit? -sv _______________________________________________ Yum-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
