tomkoenig at mindspring.com wrote:

> This change set does exactly what it says it does (depreciates upTo:).  
> However, I recommend not including it until a) we change how we respond
> to depreciated

It seems the word you and the OP are looking for is 'deprecated'.

Depreciation means a gradual reduction in value, deprecation means 
declaring obsolete.

 > and/or b) we replace a sufficient number of the upTo:
> usages.  Otherwise, this will make the image very hard to use.
> Tested in 3.9a. #6537. 
> Right now, when we get a depreciate interrupt, clicking on proceed
> appears to not allow you to ignore the error.  So IMO we can not afford
> to extend theuse depreciated ... 

Well, the response to using a deprecated feature would seem to need to 
be user-settable until the feature is actually removed. If the 
deprecation mechanism doesn't allow that, it's not much good.

> There are 80+ usages of upTo:, including most notablely AbstractString
> and MultiByteString.  When I tried to remove the one usage in BFAV, I
> found I couldnt until MBS was fixed, So BFAV became unusable.