So as I already mentioned, this would force developers
from turning off the
whole thing.
When I mentioned $wgDevelopmentWarnings, I was talking about production,
which is I why I had different paragraphs. The last one was about
development.
Anyway, one can bump the version in a wfDeprecated() call to delay the
cycle. AFAIK, the only problem in general with delaying it is the following:
a) function deprecated for version X, used by extensions A & B
b) author of A checks and complains because he can't handle the change this
cycle
c) deprecation bumped to version X+1 in response
d) author B checks and sees no warnings (since it was bumped)
e) next release comes
f) author of B checks and sees warnings and ALSO happens to be unable to
handle the change this cycle for whatever reason. It would have been nice if
he knew last cycle so maybe the time to fix could have been fit in by now.
g) we either leave author B with notices or delay the deprecation version a
second time
I still can't see a strong enough use case for the feature. It's not that it
doesn't exist, it just seems too marginal. As with chad, I don't think it's
revert war worthy.
--
View this message in context:
http://wikimedia.7.n6.nabble.com/should-we-keep-wgDeprecationWhitelist-tp36…
Sent from the Wikipedia Developers mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.