[Zope-dev] Re: Time-based releases a good idea?

[Chris McDonough]

On Jun 14, 2006, at 11:35 AM, Andreas Jung wrote:
> The general rule for Zope 2 + 3: 1 year = 2 full major releases  
> according the current half-yr schedule

OK, good!

> I never said something like that. I even did not comment on the  
> this issue
> since I have very little insight about the internals at this point.  
> Anything deprecated in 2.9 can officially be removed in 2.11. It  
> should not happen that a deprecation happens after the final release.

I think that's the sanest policy.  So it's OK if "bullshit" gets  
called on people putting deprecation warnings into any  .1, .2, etc  
through .9 releases, then?  This seems like the only thing that can  
work.  We can't expect people to upgrade to stable point releases  
(e.g. 2.8.5 from 2.8.4 or earlier) just to be able to see deprecation  
warnings.

>> But if you agree with this, in order to have a full year's  
>> deprecation
>> period, as far as I can tell, we'd need to make a policy that
>> deprecations can only be done in in .0 releases.
>
> See above..I fully agree..

Cool.
>

> A feature should never be removed if there is no reasonable  
> replacement. A feature should only be removed if it is obviously  
> broken and unfixable, totally out-dated and unmaintable.

Don't be so hard on the help system. ;-)

- C