Re: A deprecation policy

>>> "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> wrote: 
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:47:25 +0200
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> 1. In release N, an interface is declared "obsolete", which means
>> [...]
>> 2. In release N+1, obsolete interfaces are declared "deprecated",
> 
> I like the idea but aren't these two terms reversed?  In fact, isn't
> "obsolete" your third stage?  Certainly "obsolete" suggests that it
> can't be used any longer.  I'm not sure what the second stage should
> be called in that case though.
I had a similar reaction to the proposed terminology.
To me:
"Deprecated" means that some other way of doing it is available and
preferred.
"Obsolescent" (or perhaps "in end of life period") indicates that
something is expected to be removed in a future release.
"Obsolete" means it used to work, but doesn't anymore.
-Kevin