Re: [eclipse-pmc] API deprecation policy

[John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Martin,

Yes I had intended to remove the term
"draft" but forgot about it. It is now done; thanks for reminding
me. Yes, I think it's worth having open bugs for some of the remaining
issues on the AC side. The issue of javadoc tags is the most important
one to me, but as you mentioned there are other issues raised that we should
continue to track. On the Eclipse project side, my next step was to create
a new section in the platform migration guide to list upcoming removals.
I still need to get that done and I have entered a bug to track it:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=299674

John

"Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

01/14/2010 12:24 PM

Please respond to
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx

To	<eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	[eclipse-pmc] API deprecation policy

Hi all,
 
while reviewing the Architecture Bugzilla
Backlog, I stumbled over the Deprecation Policy.
 
If I am not mistaken, we agreed on the current
wording on http://wiki.eclipse.org/Eclipse/API_Central/Deprecation_Policy
but is still marked as "Draft" in its first sentence, shouldn't
that be made official?
 
Looking at some of the comments on https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=261544
I thought it might be a good idea to somehow define a place for discussing
"next steps" such that interested people can see / contribute
in such next steps. For instance
  - a database / website for recording
deprecations
  - discussions about formatting 
  - other stuff briefly though about
in bug 261544
 
In the simplest case, the deprecation policy
could just reference bug 261544, we define that to be the master bug, and
mark additional work items as dependent. Or, we create a new master bug
to just host links into dependent ones.
 
Thoughts?
Martin_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc