Re: Why is GCompletion deprecated

[Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com>]

On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 08:49 +0200, Christian Dywan wrote:

> > > One has to wonder where this "false impression" is coming from. Is
> > > it by any chance because there are loads of bugs and wiki pages
> > > about using G_DISABLE_FOOBAR and not relying on deprecated code?
> > 
> > it's a maintainer's choice to make your application rely on deprecated
> > code; all the bugs and wiki pages in the world are there in an
> > informational capacity only: I cannot get on your repository and just
> > rip code out of your application.
> 
> That is irrelevant. You expressed surprise that developers think they
> are highly encouraged to avoid deprecated code and do their best to
> keep building without it.

again, that's what you (wanted to) read but not what I wrote.

I wrote:

  there is this false impression that deprecation is akin to removal

deprecation is not removal; nowhere in wiki pages or bugs there's the
assertion that deprecated code is going to be removed *except* when
bumping API - something that we clearly decided it wasn't going to
happen for GLib, given the aggravation of doing so.

best practices say that you should not be using deprecated API because
it's basically unmaintained - which is another way of saying "Caveat
Emptor", and that if you find bugs you're going to provide a fix
yourself.

if deprecated code could be removed (without API bump) the whole point
of the gtk+ 3.0 exercise would have been moot in the first place.

ciao,
 Emmanuele.

-- 
W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name
B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi