-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.9k
Make deprecations versions explicit #17242
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Since this did not previously note a removal version, I bumped it to 3.5 (assuming this is merged for 3.3.)
The %(removal)s substition already includes 'in' or whatever prefix is necessary.
Messages without `%(since)s` and `%(removal)s` will be ambiguous as to when the were deprecated and when they will be removed.
I wonder whether we should just make the deprecation machinery check the contents of |
I was thinking about that, but it seems like one or two intentionally left it out; maybe we should only do that if |
Marking as RC, as we shouldn't put out a release without the right numbers, whatever way we decide to do it. |
pending=False explicitly disallows having a scheduled removal, so sure. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This can go in as-is or we can wait for the validation.
I bumped the dates for the above |
Going to make an executive decision and merge this. |
PR Summary
Messages without
%(since)s
and%(removal)s
will be ambiguous as to when they were deprecated and when they will be removed.Also clean up extra 'in's in the messages as
%(removal)s
will add the correct preposition.PR Checklist