Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:57:35 +0300 From: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> Cc: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.org>, phantom@FreeBSD.org, audit@FreeBSD.org, ache@FreeBSD.org, des@FreeBSD.org, jabley@automagic.org Subject: Re: whois(1) new features for review Message-ID: <20010725195735.F47466@ringworld.oblivion.bg> In-Reply-To: <6944.996077077@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za>; from sheldonh@starjuice.net on Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 06:04:37PM %2B0200 References: <20010725120952.B77004@coffee.q9media.com> <6944.996077077@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 06:04:37PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 12:09:52 -0400, Mike Barcroft wrote: > > > Peter is correct. It was my intention to slowly phase it out, but now > > that I think about it, if I completely remove the -R option, getopt(3) > > will tell the user that it's an illegal option and display the usage. > > That's not how things get deprecated. The way it used to work was, I > think: [snip removal-on-next-release description] FWIW, I like this a lot. > In addition to this, two ideas that I like are > > 1) Use of deprecated features causes warnings to be generated until the > feature is obsoleted. > > 2) Release notes warn about both deprecation and obsoletion. FWIW, I like this, too, a lot :) > I think this willy-nilly instantaneous removal of features usually just > annoys users for the sake of gratifying the impatience of committers. This has been my experience, too - both personal and from others asking me questions. G'luck, Peter -- I had to translate this sentence into English because I could not read the original Sanskrit. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010725195735.F47466>