Hi torsten I do not remember if I migrated deprecated70 to the migrator package. I should check but if someone else wants to have a look even better. Then my thought was that the streams are important and making the live of people easier to migrate important too especially since we cannot fully automate Stream deprecation.
Now I would like to understand why this is so a problem for you? Stef > On 17 Apr 2019, at 23:15, Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > in the past after each release iteration one of the first things applied to a > new development image > - was to remove the "DeprecatedXX" package of the previous version XX > - and add a new "DeprecatedYY" package for the new pharo version YY > > This allowed then to mark classes that should get obsolete for version YY and > put them into "DeprecatedYY" > > But in current Pharo 8 dev image we still have the "Deprecated70" package > inside and a new "Deprecated80" > is not yet opened. > > I know there > - were some discussion about having a "migrator" tool first to help in the > transition to the new release > (but I guess this "migrator" could be written using P7 image, no?) > > - we can also not just delete "Deprecated70" as StandardFileStream, > MultiByteFileStream and others are > still useds in the code without giving a proper > > So I wonder what is the status and on plan this in P8 > > Thx > T. >
