Yes, or "core, deprecated in future versions" in the minors.  I don't have strong feelings on the exact language just that we should indicate the long term future of a module has been decided.

Also sorry I accidentally didn't send my last reply to the list.

On 10/1/20 1:20 PM, Joshua C. Colp wrote:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 2:18 PM Corey Farrell <g...@cfware.com <mailto:g...@cfware.com>> wrote:

    Yes I'm suggesting documenting that it is deprecated in minor
    releases.  Ending support in a minor seems bad unless support
    already doesn't exist.  Could we add
    AST_MODULE_SUPPORT_CORE_DEPRECATED and
    AST_MODULE_SUPPORT_EXTENDED_DEPRECATED to `enum
    ast_module_support_level`?  Then a module would get one of those
    support levels in a minor, AST_MODULE_SUPPORT_DEPRECATED in master.


We could, but just so I'm clear - it would be stated as "to be deprecated in future" essentially in minor releases and then marked as deprecated in master?

--
Joshua C. Colp
Asterisk Technical Lead
Sangoma Technologies
Check us out at www.sangoma.com <http://www.sangoma.com> and www.asterisk.org <http://www.asterisk.org>
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Reply via email to