From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19674 invoked by alias); 9 Sep 2004 21:15:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 19637 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2004 21:15:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO balder.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.15) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 9 Sep 2004 21:15:40 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.141.72]) by balder.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.7-GR) with ESMTP id DUE33849 (AUTH halo1); Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:15:36 +0300 (IDT) Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:15:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-ID: <01c496b2$Blat.v2.2.2$22c509a0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <4140BC4C.50003@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:25:48 -0400) Subject: Re: [patch] Deprecate XM_FILE and TM_FILE Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <41376681.4050203@gnu.org> <01c4912b$Blat.v2.2.2$2bea1980@zahav.net.il> <413898FB.7080502@gnu.org> <01c49276$Blat.v2.2.2$c81daa00@zahav.net.il> <4139D06B.5060902@gnu.org> <01c4929c$Blat.v2.2.2$3333c200@zahav.net.il> <413A277E.3060700@gnu.org> <01c492ff$Blat.v2.2.2$4fec0480@zahav.net.il> <41407F45.2090401@gnu.org> <01c496a3$Blat.v2.2.2$8948c5e0@zahav.net.il> <4140BC4C.50003@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00153.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:25:48 -0400 > From: Andrew Cagney > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > > Deprecating XM_FILE means it will be deleted in the next major > > release. So I'm complaining now to prevent the more-or-less automatic > > deletion of anything that matches the regexp "deprecated.*" > > (case-insensitively) in the near future, when it would be too late to > > complain. > > This isn't correct. > > Deprecating something does not mean that it will automatically be > deleted in the next major release. We've still got stuff that was > deprecated in '99! That might be so, but I've seen too many "Garbage collect FOO" messages lately to know that, following every release, many deprecated features get eliminated in patches treated as obvious, with no discussion. > Java defines deprecation as: Andrew, can you please stop patronizing me? I think I understand English well enough to not need such lectures! > How about we get this in, and then I'll follow up (by 6.3) with patches > to finish this (as I said, I suspect I'll be doing the dirty work). As I said already, several times, I'd like the replacement to go in either before or together with this patch, not after.