GNU bug report logs - #72840
[PATCH RFC] DRAFT doc: Add “Deprecation Policy” section.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #102 received at 72840 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Greg Hogan <code <at> greghogan.com>
Cc: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>, 72840 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>,
 Noé Lopez <noe <at> xn--no-cja.eu>,
 Florian Pelz <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>, andreas <at> enge.fr
Subject: Re: bug#72840: [PATCH RFC] DRAFT doc: Add “Deprecation Policy” section.
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2024 18:20:12 +0200

Greg Hogan <code <at> greghogan.com> skribis:

> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 6:11 PM Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

[...]

>> +If it has many dependent packages---as is the case for example with
>> +Python version <at> tie{}2---the relevant team must propose a deprecation
>> +removal agenda and seek consensus with other packagers for @b{at least
>> +one month}.  It may also invite feedback from the broader user
>> +community, for example through a survey.  Removal of all impacted
>> +packages may be gradual, spanning multiple months, to accommodate all
>> +use cases.
>> +
>> +When the package being removed is considered popular, whether or not it
>> +is a leaf, its deprecation must be announced as an entry in
>> +@code{etc/news.scm}.
>
> Hi Ludo',
>
> Is the intent for the news entry to pre-announce the removal of a
> popular package, as specified for other kinds of deprecation and
> removal?

What the paragraph above means is that a news entry is published when
the popular package is deprecated, which could be months before it is
removed.

Does that make sense?

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.