[lsb-discuss] qt3: testing our deprecation strategy

[Dallman, John]

> In any case, it's been 5 years between LSB 3.0 and 4.0, and if that
> keeps up, "3 major releases" might be 15 years, which is probably way
> too long. 

Damn right. Having "releases" that count every two years, so that 3 
releases was about 6 years, would be a plausible kind of timescale. 
SuSE Linux Enterprise, which is our primary Linux, is about every two 
years, and that's quite manageable. 

> Even if we change it to be 3 releases, it may make sense for us to 
> make exceptions for interfaces/libraries that have never been used 
> in a certified application.  (Which would be a way to incentivize 
> ISV's to certify their apps.  :-)

Worth trying, but getting ISVs to notice is the hard part. 

--
John Dallman
Parasolid Porting Engineer

Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software
Industry Sector
46 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1DP
United Kingdom
Tel: +44-1223-371554
john.dallman at siemens.com
www.siemens.com/plm



> 
> Maybe, as a strawman proposal, what if we change the deprecation
> policy that if the interface/library hasn't been used in a certified
> application, an interface can be removed a year after it has been
> marked deprecated in an LSB specification?   What do folks think?
> 
>        		     	    		     	     - Ted
> _______________________________________________
> lsb-discuss mailing list
> lsb-discuss at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss