On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Bas van Dijk <v.dijk.bas@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7 June 2012 14:46, Ian Lynagh <igloo@earth.li> wrote:
> I propose that we remove ... from base.

Shouldn't they first get through a deprecation cycle?

I don't see any value to that; it just adds a year of latency.

We have plenty of evidence that "this will break in the next release" warnings are ignored until after that next release, when people who update are finally forced to confront stuff being broken.