[phobos] Why "Scheduled for deprecation?"

[Walter Bright]

Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I'm wondering what the point of marking modules as scheduled for deprecation 
> really is - at least the way that we've been doing it. I can understand marking 
> a module as scheduled for deprecation if there's a planned replacement but no 
> actual replacement yet in order to warn programmers that that module will be 
> going away. However, at present, we seem to be using it to just tell programmers 
> to use a replacement which actually does exist. That being the case, why are we 
> marking them as scheduled for deprecation rather than just deprecating them? 
> Having the pragma tell people what to use instead is certainly good, but I don't 
> quite get why we've been marking modules as scheduled to be deprecated when we 
> have a clear replacement for them and are telling programmers to use the 
> replacement. Why aren't we actually deprecating them and then just using the 
> pragma to indicate which module to use instead?
>   

Because it allows users to update their code on their own schedule, 
rather than ours. It's very annoying to have your builds break for 
reason X when you are hard at work developing Y.