Skip to content

GitLab

  • Projects
  • Groups
  • Snippets
  • Help
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in
gobject-introspection
gobject-introspection
  • Project overview
    • Project overview
    • Details
    • Activity
    • Releases
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 227
    • Issues 227
    • List
    • Boards
    • Labels
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge Requests 18
    • Merge Requests 18
  • CI / CD
    • CI / CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
  • Operations
    • Operations
    • Incidents
    • Environments
  • Packages & Registries
    • Packages & Registries
    • Container Registry
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • CI / CD
    • Repository
    • Value Stream
  • Members
    • Members
  • Collapse sidebar
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
  • GNOME
  • gobject-introspectiongobject-introspection
  • Issues
  • #121

Closed
Open
Opened Feb 05, 2015 by bugzilla-migration@bugzilla-migrationReporter

Force user to provide replacement API with Deprecated tag

Submitted by Philip Withnall @pwithnall

Link to original bug (#744057)

Description

See bug #744055 for the gtk-doc version of this.

It seems to be common for people to use the ‘Deprecated’ tag and just provide a version number. That’s quite unhelpful for anyone reading the documentation for a deprecated function, because they would also like to know what API replaces it, and why it was deprecated in the first place.

I suggest that gtk-doc make its ‘Deprecated’ tag more explicit, with the format: Deprecated: version: replacement-API: Description which is a full sentence.

The version and replacement-API would be required. The replacement-API should be the name of another symbol in the documentation, so it can be linked to; or it may be ‘no-replacement’ to explicitly indicate there is no replacement.

The description would also be required. Maybe g-ir-scanner should throw a warning if it’s less than 30 characters long, or something like that? Or is that too strict?

The replacement-API could be exposed as a new attribute in GIR files: how about ‘deprecated-for’?

As in bug #744055, spewing warnings and errors about this is going to break existing modules until they properly document their deprecations. We could start out with a warning, and then upgrade to an error after one cycle. There should be fewer problems with g-ir-scanner than with gtkdoc-scan because developers typically have introspection enabled by default, but don’t have --enable-gtk-doc enabled by default.

To upload designs, you'll need to enable LFS and have an admin enable hashed storage. More information
Assignee
Assign to
None
Milestone
None
Assign milestone
Time tracking
None
Due date
None
Reference: GNOME/gobject-introspection#121