From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF696DE1AE0 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 01:08:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.506 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.506 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.146, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TRr8K1enSr19 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 01:08:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (guru.guru-group.fi [46.183.73.34]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 896976DE199C for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 01:08:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by guru.guru-group.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CD5110005A; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 11:07:38 +0200 (EET) From: Tomi Ollila To: David Bremner , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: remove notmuch_query_{count, search}_{threads, messages} In-Reply-To: <87bmtq11dk.fsf@tethera.net> References: <20170223014656.9500-1-david@tethera.net> <87h93i6pi9.fsf@nikula.org> <87bmtq11dk.fsf@tethera.net> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.23.5+113~gfa95df1 (https://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Face: HhBM'cA~ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2017 09:08:09 -0000 On Sat, Feb 25 2017, David Bremner wrote: > Jani Nikula writes: > >> On Wed, 22 Feb 2017, David Bremner wrote: >>> These 4 functions were originally deprecated in notmuch 0.21, more >>> than a year ago. >> >> This leaves the implementations of the functions as unused code behind. I thought this was intentional as there were no LIBNOTMUCH_*_VERSION bump. > > oh oops. > >> How long until we can add them back with the same signature as the _st >> versions, and deprecate the _st versions instead? ;) >> > > I was thinking at least one release ;). So, for 0.25 the non _st versions are back, _st versions as wrapper (or some linking-time aliases?/?) for the non_st and n-year deprecation period for the _st version (to not piss developers using the API again ;) ? > > d Tomi