Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 19EA1176B7 for ; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:51:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 96704 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2014 21:51:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 96666 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2014 21:51:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 96655 invoked by uid 99); 6 Oct 2014 21:51:52 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 21:51:52 +0000 Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com [209.85.212.173]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id DA3761A0692 for ; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:51:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id fb4so6046482wid.0 for ; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:51:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.95.68 with SMTP id di4mr22878073wib.60.1412632310003; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.27.79.149 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 14:51:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 17:51:49 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Deprecation removal for 1.7.0 From: Christopher To: Accumulo Dev List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04138dbf0940f30504c81782 --f46d04138dbf0940f30504c81782 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Mike Drob wrote: > > > > > > > In general, I'm inclined to leave as much in as possible, and then if we > > must remove things then do so in 2.0.0. I know that our compatibility > > statement only promises one minor version, but that doesn't mean we have > to > > be strict at every opportunity. > > > > Mike > > > > > > Related, I'd like to EOL 1.5 shortly after 1.7 gets released. I don't want > to derail this thread with that discussion, but my guess is it's a much > easier sell if we're conservative about removing things. Just so everyone > knows where I'm coming from. > > > (+1 for EOL 1.5 after) In general, does this mean that you're okay with removing stuff deprecated prior to 1.5? With the exception of the instance.getConfiguration stuff, which was deprecated in 1.6.0 and I'd like to remove in 1.7.0, due to its problematic nature (requires further discussion), I could restrict the remaining cleanup to only stuff deprecated prior to 1.5. --f46d04138dbf0940f30504c81782--