[phobos] Decision on length of deprecation cycle

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

That should work. But then why not sticking to the current intended 
scheme? Every release, whatever has aged sufficiently gets deprecated 
and then removed.

Andrei

On 5/25/11 3:17 PM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:12:37 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu
> <andrei at erdani.com> wrote:
>
> So add a rule for minimum number of days?
>
>> That's a nice simple idea, but it's a bit difficult to appreciate that
>> a change effected somewhere in late June immediately gets enacted in a
>> matter of days.
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>> On 5/25/11 2:59 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
>>> What if the choice was made that July 4th and January 1st where the
>>> days when 2->3 and 1->2 happens. This means we don't track when
>>> something was added to what, we just have a predictable schedule.
>>> Exceptions could be made for those that must be removed for updates to
>>> be made, and maybe that can be on a compiler release basis.
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Jonathan M
>>> Davis<jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote:
>>>> The deprecation cycle has three phases:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Scheduled for deprecation
>>>> 2. Deprecated
>>>> 3. Removed
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> phobos mailing list
>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>
>