CUPS 1.3.6 [PSARC/2008/130]

[James Carlson]

Norm Jacobs writes:
> to accommodate the realities of today.  Given what I am trying to 
> acheive, perhaps "Uncommitted Obsolete" would be more appropriate. 

This is just a minor nit, but I'd suggest using "Obsolete Committed."
"Obsolete Uncommitted" is possible, but doesn't really make much
sense.  It means that we don't want people to use it (it's obsolete)
but that we're likely to make incompatible changes to it in the
future.

Other than removal (which is what "obsolete" already implies), what
incompatible changes would we bother making in an interface we're
going to tear down anyway?  Such interfaces typically don't evolve in
any meaningful way; they just get removed over time.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677