Self-correction: Deprecation policy dates by at least to 3.6 as
evidenced by an email from Doug Way in 2004 and a swiki page he created

http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3940

I'm currently leaning towards Eliot's solution and am evaluating it.  If
anyone has any concerns or preferences I would like to hear them.

Oh, and yes, I realize that I asked about deprecation and barely 24
hours later removed entire classes without any deprecation.  Evaluating
this now is part of my intention to address that.

Ken

On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 19:25 -0700, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> Hi Ken,
> 
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com> 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.
> 
> 
> It would be good to add a date, version and selector Deprecation as in
> 
> 
>     self deprecated: 'use Foo>>mumble' on: '2009/6/3' in:
> 'Croquet1.0beta'
> 
> 
> Move the preference check into Deprecation defaultAction.  This would
> allow logging to collect a set of selectors used in a particular run,
> e.g.
>     deprecations := Deprecation deprecationsWhile: [self runMyTests]
> 
> 
> as in the attached


-------------- 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/20090705/e78ec354/attachment.pgp