From: Alan W. I. <ir...@be...> - 2017-08-29 03:59:58
|
Hi Arjen: This e-mail concerns cruft removal for both the Fortran and Tcl cases. Fortran: We introduced the new Fortran binding and corresponding examples as of PLplot-5.12.0 (released on 2017-01-29), but as a safety measure supplied the old Fortran binding and examples if the user specified the CMake option -DPL_DEPRECATED_fortran=ON (which gave access to bindings/old_fortran and examples/old_fortran). Since that release I think we have gotten not even one complaint about the new fortran binding which introduced many backwards incompatible changes. (There was one complaint about lack of Fortran support in CMake for a non-mainstream Fortran compiler, but that is a different issue that affects both our old and new fortran binding for that one user.) Furthermore, the next release is likely coming out in early 2018 or roughly one year later than PLplot-5.12.0. Therefore, I believe this release cycle is the right time to get rid of the cruft consisting of the -DPL_DEPRECATED_fortran=ON option and bindings/old_fortran and examples/old_fortran. If you agree with this timing, and assuming nobody on the plplot-general list objects (i.e., there is nobody there who is still actually using the old fortran binding), then I would plan to remove this cruft within a few days from now (just to make this change early in the release cycle so it gets maximum testing before the release in early 2018). Tcl: There is a similar story with the redacted Tcl API introduced in PLplot-5.12.0. There have been no complaints about that large backwards incompatible change, and the next release will be roughly a year away from the release where this change was introduced. Therefore, I believe this release cycle is the right time to get rid of the cruft consisting of the -DUSE_NON_REDACTED_TCL_TK=ON option and the corresponding bindings/non_redacted_tcl, bindings/non_redacted_tk, bindings/non_redacted_tk-x-plat, examples/examples/non_redacted_tcl, and examples/non_redacted_tk. If you agree with this timing, and assuming nobody on the plplot-general list objects (i.e., nobody there is using the -DUSE_NON_REDACTED_TCL_TK=ON option), then I would plan to remove this cruft within a few days from now just as in the fortran cruft removal case and for similar reasons. General remarks about this cruft removal: I am pushing this cruft removal because keeping those old files around implies we should sometimes test the -DPL_DEPRECATED_fortran=ON and -DUSE_NON_REDACTED_TCL_TK=ON options (which I don't want to do) and also do minimal maintenance to the old versions of the files (which I also don't want to do). For example, I am about to remove the long-deprecated plrgb, plrgb1, plhls, and plwid. But some of those are assumed to be available (when -DPL_DEPRECATED=ON) in the old versions of the Fortran and Tcl bindings. Which implies I need to either maintain those old versions consistent with the removal of plrgb, plrgb1, plhls, and plwid or do the much simpler task of deleting those old versions. Alan __________________________ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __________________________ Linux-powered Science __________________________ |