>
> so i'm voting for this. (+1)
> basically we have three options:
> 1) f**k up 2.x by putting in deprecation
> 2) f**k up 3.x by integrating all the old stuff
> 3) f**k up deprecation policy
>
> i choose 3) ass least harmful.
>
I disagree. I think 1) is least harmful. Come on, getting "some warning"
on compile time is way fine. If people are more than trivially proficient
in Java they will know exactly what these warnings mean: "The code causing
the warning will have to be modified before upgrading the underlying
framework".
This is exactly why the deprecation policy was put in place. It is totally
infuriating to get no warning before a feature is removed. A 2.2 release,
compatible with a 3.0 release if no deprecated stuf is used, is a very
professional and responsible way to go.
A 2.1.1 bugfix release for those that need the bugfixes but can't stand
seeing the deprecation messages is not bad, but from my viewpoint it is
totally useless.
I vote +1 on B and hope that Fedor is willing to consider lifting his -1 on
the proposal.
Magnus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
