Re: "obsolete" versus "deprecated", and a new config option?

[Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu]

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:51:27 EST, "Robert P. J. Day" said:
>
>   in any event, what about introducing a new config variable,
> OBSOLETE, under "Code maturity level options"?  this would seem to be
> a quick and dirty way to prune anything that is *supposed* to be
> obsolete from the build, to make sure you're not picking up dead code
> by accident.
> 
>   i think it would be useful to be able to make that kind of
> distinction since, as the devfs writer pointed out above, the point of
> labelling something "obsolete" is not to *discourage* someone from
> using a feature, it's to imply that they *shouldn't* be using that
> feature.  period.  which suggests there should be an easy, one-step
> way to enforce that absolutely in a build.

How much of the 'OBSOLETE' code should just be labelled 'BROKEN' instead?

Attachment: pgpTvAZt8yPL2.pgp
Description: PGP signature