Re: A proposal for removing obsolete packages

[Andrew Hyatt]

address@hidden (Phillip Lord) writes:

> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>>   > Also, can you give an example of something that is obsolete but
>>   > shouldn't be removed?  That might help me understand your concern.
>>
>> defadvice might be a good example.
>
> Perhaps we need an intermediate directory, called "deprecated". Not
> obsolete, should probably still autoload -- putting defadvice into
> obsolete will break some packages for this reason alone, but should
> produce warnings.
>
> The intention would be that "deprecated" packages would move to
> "obsolete" there after.

What would the difference be between deprecated and obsolete, then?  Is
it just that obsolete would definitely be deleted and deprecated only
might be?

>
> Phil