From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A proposal for removing obsolete packages Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:54:48 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83twmkkv16.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1453258523 6070 80.91.229.3 (20 Jan 2016 02:55:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:55:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 20 03:55:14 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aLivN-0007zH-0h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 03:55:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39950 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aLivM-0005fu-8L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:55:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43877) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aLivA-0005en-6E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:54:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aLiv9-0008J7-EA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:54:56 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:43752) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aLiv6-0008IX-Ac; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:54:52 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aLiv2-00047z-UY; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:54:49 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from John Wiegley on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:28:57 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:198409 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > Agreed. And that matches our past behavior: we generally purge features > > marked obsolete more than 2 major versions ago (tho the condition shouldn't > > be based on counting major versions but on years, IMO). > I like this suggestion as well, and would like to delay purging until after a > full major release cycle. I think we should state that as a lower bound, a minimum period to wait, not as a default. To have a default waiting period before deleting obsolete features would lead us to act rigidly, rather than considering in each case what is best for the users. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org) Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.