SInce nobody else has said so explicitly yet, +1 on the case, and +1 on just needing the single case. (I.e. I'm +1'ing both the announce in S10 and the removal in OpenSolaris.)
- Garrett On 03/11/10 11:35 AM, Brian Utterback wrote: > If everyone will be happy if we just state that the removal is minor > binding and the obsolescence is patch binding, then consider it done. > > On 03/11/10 14:23, Alan Coopersmith wrote: >> Brian Utterback wrote: >>> On 03/11/10 11:48, Andrew Gabriel wrote: >>> >>>> This seems like two separate things, which need two different bindings >>>> (and would normally be two separate cases). >>>> >>>> EOL notification and interface reclassification in Solaris 10 would >>>> be a >>>> patch binding. >>>> >>>> EOL removal in Solaris Next would be a minor binding (feature >>>> removal is >>>> not eligible for patch binding). >>>> >>>> Is this what you mean? >>>> >>> >>> The project team thinks of this as one action, hence the single >>> proposal. We can split this into to cases you that is desired. >> >> EOF's (removing a feature from a product, as you're doing here) are >> often done >> as one case, but with different release bindings for the two phases, >> as Andrew >> described. >> >