Re: [nmh-workers] Novel Definition of Deprecation.

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi Ken,

> > Either it should be deprecated, or axed in a release without
> > forewarning.  And if the latter then is that agreement we can do it
> > for other things too?  After all, many users don't read the release
> > notes and thus miss the deprecation warnings, or they upgrade
> > several of our releases in one bound due to their distro, etc.,
> > striding differently, so a feature is effectively axed for them
> > without warning anyway.
...
> As for other features ... well, if they are in the same boat as
> Content-MD5 then I am fine with treating them the same way (but
> really, that'a a special case and I can't think of anything close to
> that).  Otherwise we should follow a normal depreciation schedule.

But what about our releases not matching many users' upgrade schedules
so our one-release deprecation notice is of no use to many?  That would
suggest more rapid change could be possible without the wait-a-release
delay.  The alternative is to fudge it by releasing more often so we can
hoodwink them in another way that they were given fair notice.  :-)

-- 
Cheers, Ralph.