Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[] [Bug 279539] New: [api] Deprecation: Should we require 2 years lead time from all train projects?  
Product/Component: Community / Architecture Council
           Summary: [api] Deprecation: Should we require 2 years lead time
                    from all train projects?
           Product: Community
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: Architecture Council
        ReportedBy: martin.oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
                CC: Olivier_Thomann@xxxxxxxxxx, jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
                    Darin_Wright@xxxxxxxxxx, Mike_Wilson@xxxxxxxxxx,
                    david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx, anthonyh@xxxxxxxxxx,
                    tom.schindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
                    Boris_Bokowski@xxxxxxxxxx, lchan@xxxxxxxxxxx,
                    zx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, steffen.pingel@xxxxxxxxxxx,
                    d_a_carver@xxxxxxxxx, irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
        Depends on: 261544

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #261544 +++

In the AC call on May 14, it was brought up that the single most important
point about API deprecation is whether we require all release train projects to
allow for 2 years lead time minimum before actually removing deprecated API.

I'm splitting out this discussion into a separate bug because it is a separate
aspect of the API deprecation discussion: "Indicate that it is not just idle
talk but will have consequences".

Please file your comments, thoughts, arguments and concerns here.

See bug 261544 comment 0 for an overview on issues related to deprecation.

Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

Back to the top