On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:54:45PM -0700, Volker Braun wrote:
> In general all your objections are already dealt with by the deprecation
> framework, its just that in this exceptional / self-referential case it
> didn't work. Fine. I'm open for constructive suggestions, but you haven't
> given any. In the end, this patch is about making everyone's (including
> your own) work easier by enforcing consistency in the Sage library.
> It took me more than 5h to write the patch.
Sorry, I should have repeated here what I had said on the ticket: I am
very happy with the goals of the ticket itself (improving deprecation
tools), and I am grateful that you and others spent lots of time on
it. The single piece I object, and would have put a negative review
on, was the patch that changed the calls to ``deprecation`` everywhere
in the Sage library, when those changes could easily have been handled
through a transition period.
Best,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combinat-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
