[patch] Deprecate XM_FILE and TM_FILE
Andrew Cagney
cagney@gnu.org
Mon Sep 13 21:07:00 GMT 2004
>>>>>In the past, requests to not use old mechanisms have been [er]
>>>>>> >>> declined
>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > If such a request is declined, we can reject the patch. I don't see a
>>>> > problem here.
>>
>>>
>>> That is deprecation.
>>>
>>> For us to reject such a patch we must have clearly, explicitly and
>>> formally identify the mechanism as one that should not be used, and
>>> recorded the decision in a way that both the patch reviewer and
>>> contributor can quickly and efficiently access.
>
>
> Fine. All I ask for is to record the deprecation fact somewhere other
> than in the code, until the 3 definitions are converted to use some
> better mechanism.
I've split this patch in two and committed just the TM_FILE stuff. As
for the XM_FILE changes (and those 3 definitions), consider that tabled.
It's hard enough getting developers to check one deprecation record -
the code - without trying to get them to also check a second.
Andrew
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: diffs
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/attachments/20040913/d136698f/attachment.ksh>
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list