From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id CDObKXZ15GYAVwAAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 17:25:10 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id CDObKXZ15GYAVwAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 19:25:10 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b=G1BmmAXA; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gnu.org header.s=fencepost-gnu-org header.b=AjLUvB0v; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1726248310; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=6I3L0qeeuQ6NSCgCzc127mo2h+1TG+sHQ0eoM7MvP9g=; b=bPMcOt0JpkwAPHLQvZHo11rHvzTg/ID72V8RNUMMrzA2MiZQIw0oq/CgAro3lZrywdQsa6 jErvWrT0+FPavp3UVwd049f7c9KlTKJjp9A/12MMCDKptC078S0MUSJbJvS+uWw+P2HMmf zXU+YWraHAXLxM+B1rkl9P77bw8qhxhUZbaqa2TbGHWWhNqnaGi4hGYivvJWb5xDfyiPLr ifaAY1gBc4uhovcdAJoWc9fTXBuL678xzJEzmrJw8Wh8Pk4GzEIvWWbt01aZp/j/mmCbJP tWMza9Oa6HOEue9FE0WxBQVlr9X9VTV9aWgCaOZQ2ecG25OBVT62gElyj6MstQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1726248310; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=S9ETbQbG2ifEYNFYx95zkKth44W6i9vocUpKFzLUkBz7yhizcuEpExe3vAS0PuN4Mc69lg MjYE7xNcmxwSgy+6Ika0Tge2rd2onqKesc3OOXfgiiYkkgAKqVxjTwTvUBBmcx10gZ5cfb ooCJy67ue8JbOfPhYiRHCsCAcERQXxchgzBpKxl2ZDo6SG5BADmuQWq/0sD73i1s6g9+65 qNGWo1SlN1ab5cOjzbP6TOhF68+d70GngiDIws++tpNOco0/CNJ29XzSO/RnFhhsCGhnuo Gk8Sgt4FK6B13Z8FMAr1rxC47NA9aqT0qzClvfYUsDGFqOFL5vNOw+Sv3/+uwA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b=G1BmmAXA; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gnu.org header.s=fencepost-gnu-org header.b=AjLUvB0v; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32AFA66558 for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 19:25:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1spA2V-0005ID-HK; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:24:59 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1spA2Q-0005GV-83 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:24:57 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1spA2O-0005aS-OH for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:24:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:To:Subject; bh=6I3L0qeeuQ6NSCgCzc127mo2h+1TG+sHQ0eoM7MvP9g=; b=G1BmmAXAdh8d/88O7/C4pQsfa/D8tJBTdjOGigLsVYdN6qJ5ZlVkyBluIX8OOgltPUXy1egvIONf99pCZT3Gt/y+j9FDe/XbofzVSpaH18bPeF2S2wxFNbfduBT6pcnjsZcDefHiuBebAGo3t/XzqWzra2rKakuDUV9fGO2BI21Gd3vYeVpgwzBzXuQSBb5AXGCjYLckjLnZdEFNjvRLLUCZYDSOXh7oAzjQ0iVM74AdUTCQNtP/5UIiXrI0O3f3x8xbacvbWGFBm9B7uQ9ANTX4XoaFAV8XgFgR9Vrb9ao37D6tQQbNqXcFg1Sq154VN9F34ZNXW2zR2lK88MBbIg==; Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1spA2Y-0004nW-0U for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:25:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#72840] [PATCH RFC] DRAFT doc: Add =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9CDeprecation_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Policy=E2=80=9D?= section. Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 17:25:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 72840 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: =?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez Cc: 72840@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 72840-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B72840.172624826218356 (code B ref 72840); Fri, 13 Sep 2024 17:25:01 +0000 Received: (at 72840) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Sep 2024 17:24:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44202 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1spA1u-0004lz-3y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:24:22 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44112) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1spA1s-0004lc-HC for 72840@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:24:21 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1spA1Z-0005IY-NJ; Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:24:03 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=6I3L0qeeuQ6NSCgCzc127mo2h+1TG+sHQ0eoM7MvP9g=; b=AjLUvB0vKdEChJeFWPo6 627xzwMdGX8UZn8fTpTF4ds7Gcn0OFIRiAuivFlYtLvoxDrsVZogafREFmVaXRRMUO23fsQdkGe3o AG1JL/kmONqvHd2p+y2BeP4ODPAnUXDltgEA7p2iKarddWPyaUEsqfU3vrdMPZ+b2x9xAezKEddPv vTU67EyQeRakeDWeK80zmsI7TkhLvRDjvDsoNLjbLdhBVwJxr3hT2JZWIijytkwRzz646Iir8TZG0 iMmmpyrXKgTOooLHMXPiJQCcnmg8zI+fyZhW6O4Ji64sRXXS0iN3Y6cxxPcihGzZtPa353BQWMZ4D TPeqycrQCK1rqQ==; From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= In-Reply-To: <87mskexcue.fsf@> ("=?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez"'s message of "Wed, 11 Sep 2024 20:30:17 +0200") References: <80f8b603ecd73cb9f46b1ea43797e143f16d2f17.1724785788.git.ludo@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 19:23:38 +0200 Message-ID: <87plp7fox1.fsf_-_@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Scanner: mx12.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -9.09 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 32AFA66558 X-Spam-Score: -9.09 X-TUID: ZLJuUbNqfHr/ Hi, No=C3=A9 Lopez skribis: > =E2=80=93 How do we remember to delete something after one year of deprec= ation? > Should the deprecation date be noted with the deprecation to easily see? What I and probably others did in the past was to =E2=80=98git annotate=E2= =80=99 files to see when a deprecation was added and whether it could =E2=80=9Creasonabl= y=E2=80=9D be deleted (though we had no formal rule). We can always do that, but adding a comment as you suggest is even better. > =E2=80=93 There is no policy for updating packages through major versions= , IMO > this should be the same as deleting and the previous version should be > kept for a while, at least for the time for dependencies to update > upstream. Interesting point. For many packages, a major version upgrade goes unnoticed and a deprecation period of the previous major series wouldn=E2=80=99t be useful. But for some (interpreters and compilers, =E2=80=9Cbig=E2=80=9D libraries/f= rameworks like Qt or GTK, and perhaps a few applications), there=E2=80=99s definitely going to be a need for both the old and new major series for some time. I=E2=80=99m not sure how to codify that though. Maybe the best we can do i= s to state that different situations exist and that =E2=80=9Csome=E2=80=9D major= package upgrades may require a deprecation period for the older major series? >>+If the package being removed is a ``leaf'' (no other packages depend on >>+it), it may be removed after a @b{one-month review period} of the patch >>+removing it (this applies even when the removal has additional >>+motivations such as security problems affecting the package). > > =E2=80=93 Why do =C2=AB=C2=A0leaves=C2=A0=C2=BB get removed at all? The d= ependents could be > users that installed it in their profiles or manifests, one month > seems very low. This paragraph talks about packages that are unmaintained or EOL upstream. What it says is that such packages could be removed, at the soonest, one month after they have become umaintained/EOL upstream. The reasons we=E2=80=99d want to remove such packages is to clean up the pa= ckage collection (every package adds to the overall maintenance cost) and to avoid steering users towards unmaintained and possibly insecure software. Is one-month after upstream too short? I=E2=80=99d say =E2=80=9Cno=E2=80= =9D, but we can discuss. Two things to keep in mind in this discussion: (1) the policy does not state an obligation to remove those packages, and (2) packages remain available =E2=80=9Cforever=E2=80=9D for those who need it via =E2=80=98time= -machine=E2=80=99. > PS: RFCs don=E2=80=99t get announced to guix-devel? I only found out abou= t this > from mastodon. My bad! I thought I had Cc=E2=80=99d guix-devel, but apparently not? (Did t= he =E2=80=98send-email=E2=80=99 hook override the =E2=80=98Cc:=E2=80=99 or =E2= =80=98X-Debbugs-Cc:=E2=80=99 header I had put?) Ludo=E2=80=99.