> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Haley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 7:19 AM > To: Manuel López-Ibáñez > Cc: NightStrike; gcc@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: GCC 4.3 target deprecation proposals > > > I agree that weighing the user base doesn't make any > practical sense. > > But I can't understand the reason for removing something that works > > fine because it may rot in the future. I understand that if > you don't > > get test results then you may assume there are no users. But if you > > get test results and they are fairly clean? > > The interface between gcc and the back-ends changes fairly frequently, > so it's necessary for a target to be maintained or it will > cease to work. > > > Another different matter would be if there were a lot of > test failures > > and open bug reports. Then it will be fair to send all test-results > > reporters and bug subscribers a message saying: > > > > "If no one steps up to maintain this, the target will be removed in > > the next release." > > That's what target deprecation is: we always deprecate in > one release cycle > and delete in a subsequent cycle. >
I've been lurking on this list long enough to see the same questions, with the same answers, every time the subject of target deprecations comes up. If it doesn't exist somewhere already, can the criteria that Joseph used be set as a recurring policy and documented somewhere? Can we have an FAQ set up somewhere for the inevitable questions/concerns that follow the release of a proposed target deprecation list? Eric Weddington
