On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Pino Toscano <ptosc...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Saturday, 3 September 2016 20:47:15 CEST Jim Meyering wrote: ... > Another thing: should some deprecation warning/note be added regarding > the progname module?
I like the idea of adding a deprecation warning. If it could be completely replaced, I'd suggest to add the "Status: deprecated" attribute to its modules file, but we don't have a replacement for set_program_name, so there may still be legitimate uses. If a future change were to move set_program_name into its own new module, *then*, we could officially deprecate the progname module. > Is NEWS the proper place for them? Attached there > is a small documentation addendum. Good idea. While this is not officially an incompatible change, converting is invasive enough that this NEWS blurb belongs in that section. I've split a long sentence and merged that into your first commit. And pushed. >> I'm prepared to push the attached, but will wait for your ack. If you're interested, one more thing that may help avoid trouble would be to add a syntax-check rule to prohibit new uses of this module, including new inclusion of progname.h, new declarations of program_name or anything else you can think of that should no longer be done here in gnulib.
