[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] doc: make RTE_NEXT_ABI optional

[Thomas Monjalon]

24/01/2019 19:10, Ferruh Yigit:
> Initial process requires oncoming changes described in deprecation
> notice should be implemented in a RTE_NEXT_ABI gated way.
> 
> This has been discussed in technical board, and since this can cause a
> multiple #ifdef blocks in multiple locations of the code, can be
> confusing specially for the modifications that requires data structure
> changes. Anyway this was not happening in practice.
> 
> Making RTE_NEXT_ABI usage more optional based on techboard decision:
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-January/123519.html
> 
> The intention with using RTE_NEXT_ABI was to provide more information
> to the user about planned changes, and force developer to think more in
> coding level. Since RTE_NEXT_ABI become optional, now the preferred way
> to do this is, if possible, sending changes, described in deprecation
> notice, as a separate patch and reference it in deprecation notice.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com>
> Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman at tuxdriver.com>

Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>