On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 12:14:33PM -0500, Phil Steitz wrote: > The deprecations below are in the wrong source tree. They need to be > applied to the 2.x branch and unless it is just as a signal to those > building (dangerously) from trunk, I do not see the point of deprecating in > the 3.0 branch.
This was done on purpose, in order to have one revision containing the deprecation message before actually removing the code. That way, someone can possibly get the files with the deprecation tags and copy them over to the 2.x branch. > I am -0 on applying these to the 3.0 branch, since the code should be > removed before release (i.e., the code should simply be removed in the 3.0 > branch) and -1 on applying them to 3.0 without first applying to 2.x. > Please either apply to 2.x or revert. Revert what? I'll copy the files as suggested above, but the information in there will be inconsistent (e.g. the replacement classes are *not* in the branch). Luc already said that it was a nightmare to keep the branches in sync. [I do not have time for that. I mean: I do not have time for that.] Luc also indicated that 2.2 will/should be considered as a maintenance release: Users will be able to stick with 2.2 or upgrade to 3.0, but will not be able able to make all their code compatible with 3.0 while running on 2.2. Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
