cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Decreasing the Deprecation Time
Date Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:32:35 GMT
Huge +1 to decreasing the time.  I also *really* like the suggestion of
moving towards deprecation time in-terms-of-releases.  This is easier to
track for everyone.  It also means we can leverage changes to the way we
manage releases in git (so, for example, we can give even longer-term
support for deprecated features without sacrificing regression fixes by
having app dev switch to a "stable" branch).

-Michal


On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Lorin Beer <lorin.beer.dev@gmail.com>wrote:

> given the reasoning presented by Joe and Tommy, I'm +1 for this.
> It strikes me that a project which releases as often as ours (~1/month)
> needs to have a deprecation policy based on that, not an arbitrary fixed
> length of time.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
> <tommy@devgeeks.org>wrote:
>
> > Just my $0.02, but it almost seems like you are hampering yourselves
> while
> > at the same time introducing very little in the way of stability anyway.
> >
> > No one sees a deprecation warning and thinks "ooh… better not use that…",
> > they say "a warning is not an error" and move on with their project.
> >
> > As a plugin author, I was one of the proponents of the deprecation
> policy,
> > yet I still feel like plugins break every 2-3 releases anyway, so why
> hold
> > yourselves back on other changes/features?
> >
> > - tommy
> >
> >
> >
> > On 13/03/2013, at 9:14 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hey
> > >
> > > When we first set up the deprecation policy, we did it because we
> > > didn't anticipate that we would create massive breakage with Cordova.
> > > Unfortunately as we get closer to 3.0, it seems clear that we agreed
> > > on a policy that isn't allowing us to develop as fast as we would
> > > like.  For example, we had to wait six months to remove old history
> > > code that we could have safely removed three months ago when it was
> > > clear that maintaining our own history was not the right way to work
> > > around issues.
> > >
> > > So, I propose that we change the deprecation policy from six months to
> > > the past three releases.  Since we release once a month at most, this
> > > will allow us to update the software without having the overhead that
> > > we currently have with the current policy.  Point releases (i.e.
> > > 2.5.1) would not count as a release under this policy, it would have
> > > to be a minor release (i.e. 2.5.0) or a major release (3.0).
> > >
> > > Any thoughts on this?
> > >
> > > Joe
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message