[squeak-dev] Deprecation policy

Ken Causey ken at kencausey.com
Fri Jul 3 22:01:37 UTC 2009


On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 16:41 -0500, Ken Causey wrote:
> I would like to suggest that we develop a formal deprecation policy.  It
> could be as simple as deprecate in one release, remove in the next.  I
> just think we need to be consistent about it and remove no individual
> methods without following it.  How this relates to the idea of
> repackaging and removing whole categories of classes, I'm not so sure.
> 
> Ken

Jecel (on IRC) has reminded me that this is nothing new and is basically
the policy that was used starting with 3.8.

Edgar:  Did you or Ralph remove any methods marked as deprecated prior
to 3.10?  I'm thinking not since there is a package 39Deprecated still
in 3.10.2 and a number of other callers of #deprecated: .

In addition to an overall policy we need a policy on keeping track of
deprecations.  Perhaps it should be standard that the deprecation error
message clearly states the release in which the deprecation occurred.
Or we could continue to follow the example of 3.9.

Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20090703/ea07fae2/attachment.pgp


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list