On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 17:03 +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: > > --On 14. Juni 2006 10:59:09 -0400 Chris McDonough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So... you're saying that 2.10 isn't going to be released until December > > 2006, then? > > huh? The wiki says June/July...we are just running a bit late with the beta > releases because Philikon needed some time for the ZPT integration..so why > December?
Buh.................... oh geez, let's just forget it. ;-) > > > That would indeed make the deprecation period longer than 1 > > year, which seems to have been the intent. > > This makes no sense to me. Let's start clean here. What interval of time is reasonable for the period between a to-be-removed piece of code emitting a deprecation warning and that code's removal? If you think 8 months is reasonable, it would make sense, for example, that the code in OFS.Application that looks for a module-scope '__ac_permissions__' in all products would be removed for 2.10 (as its deprecation warning currently states). If you think that's too short a time, then it's broken. Personally I think 8 months is too short a time, and I think it should be at least one year and I think most folks agree with this. I don't remember what the official policy is nor would I know where to find it. But if you agree with this, in order to have a full year's deprecation period, as far as I can tell, we'd need to make a policy that deprecations can only be done in in .0 releases. That would ensure at least a full year between the first deprecation and the code removal. Any other policy does not make sense if the goal is to have full-year-long deprecation periods. And at this point, IMO, a feature isn't really deprecated until it emits a warning. Older releases didn't emit deprecation warnings (partly because there was no "warnings" module), so basically *we tried not to deprecate anything* and we always strove (but only partially succeeeded) at full-bore backwards compatibility, cruft-be-damned. Things are better now, so we can deprecate stuff, but we still need to be consistent about how we do it. - C _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
