Re: Upcoming platform deprecations

[Elijah Newren <newren gmail com>]

On 10/10/05, Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com> wrote:
> > Yes, that's true.  But this thread really isn't about making stuff
> > stop working (I hope!), just about deprecation
>
> Yes, my point is just that and
> imminent-deprecation-without-official-replacement announcement scares
> people more than a deprecation-with-official-replacement. And the
> slightest bit of doubt makes the API useless, so you've effectively
> deprecated it without a replacement.

Not quite.  If the API is already useless, then introducing doubt
can't make it change to become useless for that would not be a change.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.  ;-)

However, on a more serious note, you've compared
deprecation-without-official-replacement and
deprecation-with-official-replacement.  And I agree with your
explanation of why the latter is better.  But the latter isn't
possible at this time, right?  How would you compare 
deprecation-without-official-replacement vs.
lack-of-communicating-planned-future-changes?

Cheers,
Elijah