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
