Return-Path: 
 <ant-dev-return-20866-qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-dev=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@apache.org
Received: (qmail 15974 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 23:45:19 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2001 23:45:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 29191 invoked by uid 97); 6 Dec 2001 23:45:24 -0000
Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 29175 invoked by uid 97); 6 Dec 2001 23:45:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ant-dev-subscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
List-Id: "Ant Developers List" <ant-dev.jakarta.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 29164 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 23:45:23 -0000
Message-ID: <3C0F7B58.42816D0C@i2.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 08:06:16 -0600
From: Ken Wood <kwood@i2.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ant Developers List <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Re: removing deprecated stuff
References: <NDBBIMHCHMPELMBMMFIMAEKCHFAA.conor@cortexebusiness.com.au>
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on i2Hub4/Servers/i2Tech(Release 5.0.8
 |June 18, 2001) at
 12/06/2001 08:06:56 AM,
	Serialize by Router on i2Hub4/Servers/i2Tech(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at
 12/06/2001 05:45:22 PM,
	Serialize complete at 12/06/2001 05:45:22 PM
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

<disappointed>

  This is why Ant 2 will probably never happen. Something
  as simple and straightforward as removing deprecated features
  has now been debated for weeks, and I see no end in sight...

  While open source has it's merits, a project ultimately needs
  a visionary, a chief architect, a top dog who takes all the
  input, makes a final decision, and moves on to the next issue
  so that progress can be made.

</disappointed>

I agree with number 3. When I started getting deprecation warnings
for my use of "rename", I was most pleased with the fact that
the warning not only told me that rename was deprecated, but it
also show what task and options to use to replace it. So I took
a few minutes to edit my build.xml, and moved on with my life.

Conor MacNeill wrote:
> 
> Hmmm,
> 
> I can't help but feel we are going a little astray here. The whole idea,
> IMHO, behind deprecating things is to ultimately remove them and simplify
> the Ant codebase. Keep it simple, reduce maintenance overhead, etc.
> 
> By adding a whole lot of logic to decide whether a feature is deprecated and
> allowed, etc, we just seem to be adding complexity we don't really need.
> 
> In my view we should either
> 
> 1. not bother deprecating things since we will never remove them
> 2. deprecate things to encourage better usage but not remove them
> 3. deprecate things and remove after at least one release of being
> deprecated.
>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>