Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2012
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 08:00:14PM -0500, David Golden wrote: > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Ricardo Signes > <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> wrote: > > Please let me know whether I understand properly. Here is an example based on > > my understanding of your suggestion. Please note that, for the sake of > > simplicity, I have not included feature.pm behavior in this example. > > > > 1. We realize that adding foozles was a horrible mistake. > > 2. We add "foozles" to the Future Deprecations section of perl5200delta > > 3. In 5.21.0, we add the deprecation warning. > > 4. In 5.23.0, we remove foozles. > > Correct. With the annual release cycle, that's a two year period from > stable-release "notice of future removal" to stable-release "removal", > one year without warnings and one with. That makes me more happy than adding a deprecation warning as soon as we realize foozles was a mistake and is deemed to be removed. It gives people a chance to act without being nagged on each and every run of the program. Now, it may be useful if there was a "predeprecation" category, which by default is *off* on a plain "no warnings;", in that case, we'd add a predeprecation warning for foozle in 5.19.0, and upgrade it to a deprecation warning in 5.21.0 (kind of like Yves plan, while keeping the current deprecation warning untouched). AbigailThread Previous | Thread Next