Re: [commit] Deprecate remaining STREQ uses

[Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>]

On Nov 24, 11:50am, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> You've been pushing very hard to renaming things to deprecated_foo for
> a while now.  I think I'm not the only other maintainer who doesn't
> understand or approve.  It's a lot of work for you; it generates large
> patches and source churn; it causes patch rejects and merge errors for
> other developers; and the rest of us don't see or agree on the benefit.
> Isn't that the sort of thing which should be discussed instead of
> implemented?
> 
> Or am I out in a corner by myself here?

You are not off in a corner by yourself.

I think that renaming interfaces to contain the "deprecated_" prefix
has value in some instances, such as when the use of the interface is
filled with so much hair that it's risky to attempt to convert it
without a great deal of thought.

IMO, it should be possible to convert uses of STREQ/STREQN without
much risk.

I too would like to see discussion over whether a particular interface
ought to be deprecated or outright replaced instead of presenting the
renaming as a fait accompli.

Kevin