From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] doc: add deprecation marker usage Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 17:46:33 +0100 Message-ID: <1683594.zcY9JutAjD@xps> References: <20190122162310.53613-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <3155698.1yX0fgTuye@xps> <9400e996-2f6e-d3da-9c95-06e8a42087fd@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, John McNamara , Marko Kovacevic , Luca Boccassi , Kevin Traynor , Yongseok Koh , Neil Horman To: Ferruh Yigit Return-path: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC9C239 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 17:46:54 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <9400e996-2f6e-d3da-9c95-06e8a42087fd@intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 01/02/2019 18:06, Ferruh Yigit: > On 1/31/2019 5:17 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >> + > >> +Reminder that new API should follow deprecation process to be able to replace old API. > > This last sentence is not clear to me. > > I think you mean the old API should follow deprecation process > > to be removed (replaced). > > Yes, we are trying to say same thing. > > Deprecation process required for replacing API. I think it is important to emphasize that the process applies to removal.