ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Magesh Umasankar" <>
Subject Re: Speaking of deprecation...
Date Tue, 05 Feb 2002 20:18:22 GMT
From: "Peter Donald" <>

> >
> > If it has been more than 2 releases old,
> > then +1 to chuck it away from documents.
> > Otherwise, I would prefer they stay
> > because a user transitioning, say, from
> > Ant 1.4 to 1.6 should be able to see
> > the deprecation warning before we pull
> > it off altogether.
> Not sure I follow. I think Diane is saying we narf documentation for
> deprecated attributes/elements. So that deprecated attributes can stay
> forever and will issue warnings when used. ie
> DEPRECATED: Attribute foo deprecated, use bar instead.
> So I would be +1 on removing docs, -1 on removing underlying method.

What I meant was, +1 on removing it from docs
after its been deprecated in docs for 2 releases.
User should be able to read the docs and understand
what has been deprecated and what will be removed
in the next few releases before it goes away
altogether.  For example, MimeMail now shows up
as deprecated in docs and will tell the user to use
<mail> instead.  If this were removed totally right away,
user wouldn't know where mimemail went, for example.

I am not talking about the deprecated warning that
Ant provides - rather the deprecated tag that appears
in html...

Hope this clarifies.

> Pete


*  Etc.: A sign to make others believe that  *
*  you know more than you actually do.       *

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message