[stdlib-sig] standardizing the deprecation policy (and hownoisy they are)
ronaldoussoren at mac.com
Tue Nov 10 16:48:25 CET 2009
On 10 Nov, 2009, at 16:31, geremy condra wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Ned Deily <nad at acm.org> wrote:
>> In article
>> <f3cc57c60911100650q551ca79em59d7c47ff61aa5a6 at mail.gmail.com>,
>> geremy condra <debatem1 at gmail.com>
>>> Ok, so whats wrong with just saying
>>> import warnings
>>> and walking away?
>> If the package is a stand-alone application (c.f. Barry's bzr example),
>> it's not reasonable to ask end users to modify its code; they may not
>> even be able to easily (i.e. root privileges required). More generally,
>> it seems unfair and unwise to ask the 10 000 users of a package to take
>> action when ultimately the 1 maintainer of the package is the one who
>> needs to do so.
>> Ned Deily,
>> nad at acm.org
> Let me rephrase- I'm not asking end users to silence them, I'm
> saying that if it annoys the end users so much, the devs should
> do it themselves.
How do I do that for the libraries I distribute? Users of my libraries should not get DeprecationWarnings about my code, but I should be able to generate DeprecationWarnings of my own when I deprecate some of my APIs. Oh, and it should still be possible for me to check for DeprecationWarnings in my code.
> Geremy Condra
> stdlib-sig mailing list
> stdlib-sig at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3567 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the stdlib-sig