Re: [O] document depreciation of timeline?

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Gregor Zattler <address@hidden> writes:

> There are only two commits which mention the timeline in their
> summry lines in the newer git history since 2008-01-31.
>
> Shouldn't the feature then be officially depreciated and
> mentioned as stale in the manual?  The manual mentions the
> timeline in most cases together with the agenda.  And there is a
> small chapter dedicated to the timeline.
>
> If depreciation of the timeline is OK I would patch the manual
> accordingly.

I'm all for it. I think we shouldn't even document deprecated features
in the manual, otherwise, they just never go away.

In any case, Bastien will have the last word on the matter.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou