From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7854 invoked by alias); 27 Sep 2004 17:55:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7832 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2004 17:55:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.108) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 Sep 2004 17:55:39 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 176C847D95; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 17:55:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Cc: Andrew Cagney , Eli Zaretskii Subject: Discussion: Formalizing the deprecation process in GDB Message-ID: <20040927175539.GS974@gnat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00239.txt.bz2 Per Andrew Cagney's request, I am reposting here a message I sent on gdb-patches after a long discussion between Andrew and Eli Zaretskii on when parts of GDB's code can be marked as deprecated and how they should be marked as deprecated. Andrew also asked me to post Eli's answer, but I can't find it in the archives. Sorry Eli, you'll have to resend them. >It seems to me that the whole discussion between Eli and yourself has >been beaten to death. We're basically stuck in a disagrement where both >point of views have their merit. > >I think it's time all global maintainers get involved in this discussion >and make a decision. Once the decision is taken, it needs to be >documented (gdb.texinfo for instance) so that people can refer to it. > >As a developper, I personally dislike to have to check the ARI everytime >I use anything in GDB for fear of using something deprecated. So marking >each instance as explicitly deprecated directly in the code is a good >move. Two questions were asked and need to be answered. I am adding my >proposed answers, as a starting point for your discussion: > > 1. When can some code be declared deprecated? > > IMO, some code should be declared deprecated when it has been > recognized that it should no longer be used in new changes. > It means that some code can be identified as deprecated before > a replacement has been implemented. > > There is a judgement call to make, obviously, as we don't want to > deprecate a central piece of GDB that makes it impossible for > somebody to submit a new port for instance without doing man-years > of work required to implement an alternate to the deprecated > feature. > > 2. How to identify deprecated code? > > Deprecated code should be explicitly marked as such directly > in the code, to avoid any accidental future usage, by prepending > "depreated_" to the entity names. > > Deprecated code can only be removed when no longer used. There can > be no time limit imposed between the time some code is deprecated, > and the time when it is removed. > > (the alternate solution suggested by Eli is the ARI) > >You should decide how the discussion will be held (privately or on >gdb-patches?), and whether it should include the steering committee >or not. -- Joel