Re: [boost] Breaking existing libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] Breaking existing libraries
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-22 12:02:33

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Breaking existing libraries

> 
> on Fri Nov 21 2008, Markus Werle <numerical.simulation-AT-web.de> wrote:
> 
>> [Sidenote: I'd prefer boost::spirit to stay as it is and spirit2c be renamed to 
>> boost::ultimate_parser, since it is a *completely* *different* library.]
>> The boost community has not found the perfect way to deal with breaking 
>> changes yet, since this is an issue that cannot be easily solved.
> 
> It's something that we could easily do better.

Please could you be more precise?

>> The key issue is: You did not pay for what you use. 
> 
> I'm sorry to contradict, but I don't think that's the key issue.  IMO,
> the key issue is giving care to disoverability and the ability to make a
> transition:
> 
> * Avoiding completely silent breakage
> 
> * Using a deprecation period to give users notice that a breaking
>   change is coming
> 
> * Documenting a transition procedure
> 
> * ....etc.

I'm completly in face with this but what do you mean by transition procedure? Do you mean to document how the deprecated features are removed?

Thanks,

Vicente