From owner-freebsd-current Mon Feb 25 2:21:41 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B3737B402; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:21:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from 12-234-22-238.client.attbi.com ([12.234.22.238]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020225102136.LUZA2626.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@12-234-22-238.client.attbi.com>; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 10:21:36 +0000 Received: from master.gorean.org (root@master.gorean.org [10.0.0.2]) by 12-234-22-238.client.attbi.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g1PALPq77660; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:21:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DougB@FreeBSD.org) Received: from master.gorean.org (doug@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by master.gorean.org (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g1PALOLR023120; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:21:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DougB@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (doug@localhost) by master.gorean.org (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) with ESMTP id g1PALKMZ023109; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:21:24 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: master.gorean.org: doug owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:21:20 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Barton X-X-Sender: doug@master.gorean.org To: Josef Karthauser Cc: Mike Barcroft , Subject: Re: LSCOLORS warning is silly In-Reply-To: <20020225094024.GA25472@genius.tao.org.uk> Message-ID: <20020225021906.B22466-100000@master.gorean.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Josef Karthauser wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 02:38:45AM -0500, Mike Barcroft wrote: > > Doug Barton writes: > > > Mike Barcroft wrote: > > > > Deprecated features should generate warnings. > > > > > > Ok, then let's call it "Undocumented legacy support." I agree that > > > features we don't want to support anymore should generate warnings that > > > encourage users to change. However, there is so little cost to support > > > the old flags that there is no reason to ever discontinue that support. > > > it's two lines of code. You can see them in the diff. The code is even > > > properly documented to indicate it's purpose. It can't get any better > > > than that. > > > > I don't have any objections to making this a supported legacy mode, > > but I think deprecated features (things we *want* to go away) should > > produce warnings. > > I'd prefer not to support N different ways of specifying colours, and > want to hold onto making the deprecated version include warnings. I could understand your argument if there were A) many different ways, or B) support for the one legacy method was complicated. But neither of these are true. Including a warning for something that is easy to support and costs us nothing is pointlessly pedantic. Do you have a technical reason for your position? -- "We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory." - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message