From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
Cc: kettenis@gnu.org, brobecker@gnat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch] Deprecate XM_FILE and TM_FILE
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 19:48:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01c499ca$Blat.v2.2.2$8aaaa820@zahav.net.il> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4145BDB1.6010601@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:33:05 -0400)
> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:33:05 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> Cc: kettenis@gnu.org, brobecker@gnat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> > It's about a point where something can be deprecated, and also about
> > the conditions that should be fulfilled for that.
>
> I think this is progress, this discussion is finally focusing in on
> specific concerns.
This was my intent from the beginning. I'm glad that I finally
succeeded in explaining myself.
> >>> In the past, requests to not use old mechanisms have been [er]
> >>> declined
> >
> >
> > If such a request is declined, we can reject the patch. I don't see a
> > problem here.
>
> That is deprecation.
>
> For us to reject such a patch we must have clearly, explicitly and
> formally identify the mechanism as one that should not be used, and
> recorded the decision in a way that both the patch reviewer and
> contributor can quickly and efficiently access.
Fine. All I ask for is to record the deprecation fact somewhere other
than in the code, until the 3 definitions are converted to use some
better mechanism.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-13 19:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-02 18:30 Andrew Cagney
2004-09-02 20:26 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-03 16:18 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-04 12:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-04 14:27 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-04 16:28 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-04 23:20 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-05 4:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-09 16:05 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-09 19:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-09 20:26 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-09 21:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-09 21:26 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-09-10 9:35 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-10 12:41 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-09-10 16:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-12 18:07 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-12 18:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-13 15:35 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-13 19:48 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2004-09-13 21:07 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-13 21:30 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-09-24 22:06 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-15 12:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-15 15:54 ` Andrew Cagney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='01c499ca$Blat.v2.2.2$8aaaa820@zahav.net.il' \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=brobecker@gnat.com \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kettenis@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox