Should deprecated (still active) behavior be documented?

[Jared Beck]

Hello rails friends,

I'd like to propose that all documentation contributions for deprecated behavior be considered. I personally find documentation of deprecated behavior to be useful. I don't think that a docs contribution should be rejected solely because it relates to deprecated behavior.

Such documentation should make it clear that the behavior is deprecated. Removal of such documentation should not be considered until the behavior is actually removed.

Does this make sense?

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

[Kasper Timm Hansen]

This sounds very abstract yet specific to cases you’ve seen. Where have you found documentation to be missing, rejected or prematurely removed?

--

Kasper

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-co...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-core/pE9u9S6_CTpNCUhb_o_Z0KAdIVHW2dwg1LZ7QzCf4hzk3S1HSj9DN399Gdm25GicA7fQVer-ITRlotRJC4PeYeYT_6QjWt9uMyvFooAFcZQ%3D%40jaredbeck.com.

[Dave Shaffer]

I'm curious about this as well, but I am also +1 for Jared's proposal. There's a lot of Rails terra incognita.

On Wednesday, December 18, 2019 at 4:57:47 PM UTC-5, Kasper Timm Hansen wrote:

This sounds very abstract yet specific to cases you’ve seen. Where have you found documentation to be missing, rejected or prematurely removed?

--

Kasper

On 18 Dec 2019, at 18.54, Jared Beck <ja...@jaredbeck.com> wrote:

Hello rails friends,

I'd like to propose that all documentation contributions for deprecated behavior be considered. I personally find documentation of deprecated behavior to be useful. I don't think that a docs contribution should be rejected solely because it relates to deprecated behavior.

Such documentation should make it clear that the behavior is deprecated. Removal of such documentation should not be considered until the behavior is actually removed.

Does this make sense?

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonra...@googlegroups.com.

[Kasper Timm Hansen]

Just to clarify the thing that’s great currently is that maintainers get to move on quickly without having the old docs around. Though I’m paraphrasing and would need specific cases to verify this.

Curious too if this is solved via the versioned API docs? For example, https://api.rubyonrails.org/v6.0.0/classes/Mail.html

--

Kasper

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-co...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-core/5adbea05-350f-4723-908b-6e7a326283a6%40googlegroups.com.