On 05/09/2007, at 2:32 PM, Derek Scherger wrote:
William Uther wrote:
On 05/09/2007, at 12:49 PM, Derek Scherger wrote:
It would be nice if we could somehow say "this is here in
automate land
but is still experimental and may change." Could we simply add a
stable/unstable status to the interface documentation or some
sort of
deprecation indicator that says "this old automate command is
going to
go away in version x.yy" or something?
I was actually thinking of proposing something like this for my
automate
commands, but it was still sitting on the TODO list when Nat
posted his
critique. I didn't think that a response to his critique was
politically the best time to propose it (and I still half agree
with him
- even if it is experimental, it should still be documented).
Heh... leave it to me to get my foot in my mouth.
No - no foot in mouth. I didn't want to propose it, but I have no
issue with someone else doing it.
I do agree that it should be documented, I'd just like to find a
way to
be able to try out new automate commands while retaining some
flexibility in case they don't turn out so well.
Yes - I agree.
Will :-}
_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel