Re: [Bug 164] Add the build option "/D DISABLE_NEW_DEPRECATED_INTERFACES" in package DSC files

[Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>]

> On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:58 PM, Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> On 2016-10-21 12:37:21, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> I don't remember seeing any discussion regarding
>> DISABLE_NEW_DEPRECATED_INTERFACES on the list, so I am a bit surprised
>> seeing these bugs being filed and assigned.
>> 
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Also, the terminology seems confusing. 'new deprecated' seems like a
> contradiction. I guess it means 'newly deprecated', but that seems
> like a term that is quickly going to become obsolete. Soon there will
> be old deprecated items that are disabled with this switch.
> DISABLE_DEPRECATED_INTERFACES sounds better.
> 
> But, shouldn't we have platforms opt-in to using the deprecated
> interfaces rather than adding DISABLE_NEW_DEPRECATED_INTERFACES to the
> build command line for every EDK II platform?
> 
> Not using deprecated items should be the default for EDK II platforms.
> If a platform has to opt-in to the deprecated content in their .dsc,
> then it is obvious that they are relying on deprecated functionality.
> 
> So, I guess I'd propose adding ENABLE_DEPRECATED_INTERFACES instead.
> 

Jordan,

I think it depends on your point of view. If you have a platform that works and you update the edk2 revision you would expect it to still work. Thus the option is to DISABLE_DEPRECATED_INTERFACES as that maintains backward compatibility. 

I think it makes total sense to turn on DISABLE_DEPRECATED_INTERFACES on all the open source edk2 platform as soon as possible so all the open source code is following current best practices.

Not to mention it would probably be a really good idea to give all the downstream folks a long lead time about the plan of making a non backward compatible change. 

Thanks,

Andrew Fish


> -Jordan
> 
>> Before making any such changes, I would like a strong commitment from
>> other package owners that deprecating an interface brings along with
>> it the responsibility to update all existing callers, otherwise
>> setting this define will only result in more breakage, and ARM has
>> seen its share of inadvertent breakage in the past when changes to
>> core code were made without taking other architectures into account.
>> 
>> On 21 October 2016 at 02:21,  <bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.tianocore.org> wrote:
>>> https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164
>>> 
>>> yonghong.zhu@intel.com changed:
>>> 
>>>           What    |Removed                     |Added
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>           Priority|Lowest                      |Normal
>>>             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |CONFIRMED
>>>           Assignee|michael.d.kinney@intel.com  |ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org
>>>     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
>>>     Release(s) the|                            |EDK II Trunk
>>>     issues must be|                            |
>>>              fixed|                            |
>>> 
>>> --- Comment #1 from yonghong.zhu@intel.com ---
>>> Assign to Package owner.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> You are receiving this mail because:
>>> You are the assignee for the bug.
>> _______________________________________________
>> edk2-devel mailing list
>> edk2-devel@lists.01.org <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
>> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel <https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel>