WITHOUT_NLS is deprecated use NLS option instead

[Michael Gmelin]

On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 09:27:34 -0700 (MST)
Warren Block <wblock at wonkity.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Dec 2013, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 09:18:57AM -0700, Warren Block wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Dec 2013, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:55:56PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> >>>> On 12/25/2013 10:51 PM, clutton wrote:
> >>>>> Sorry, but I have a quite opposite view. Making both variants
> >>>>> work means chaos. More variants means more complication.
> >>>>
> >>>> if <options for nls mean no> || WITHOUT_NLS; then
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This is not chaos. It's called "backwards compatibility," which
> >>>> is a critical part of every mature software project.
> >>>>
> >>>> OTOH, forcing users to jump through stupid hoops to change
> >>>> configurations which have worked for over a decade is a sign of
> >>>> the inmates running the asylum.
> >>>>
> >>>> Doug
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Backward compatility is still in there, this is a warning to the
> >>> users, so that they do get time to migrate. And it will stay for
> >>> a while, even if OPTIONS_UNSET=NLS is recommanded for more than a
> >>> year.
> >>
> >> It would be nice if that was added to the warning:
> >>
> >> /!\ WARNING /!\
> >> WITHOUT_NLS is deprecated: use NLS option or OPTIONS_UNSET=NLS
> >> instead
> >
> > use NLS option == OPTIONS_UNSET=NLS but yes I'll make the message
> > more clear.
> 
> To me, "use NLS option" implied using the options menu for the port.

Adding a (shortened, so easy to type) URL pointing to the wiki or
whatever resource describing why this happened could be useful (not just
for this, but for all of these deprecation warnings, so users
understand the rationale behind them).

-- 
Michael Gmelin