Progress some planned deprecations

[MichaelChirico]

#5840 will be filed separately since it's a new deprecation --> warrants its own PR.

These are simply progressing existing deprecation cycles to their next steps.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (6c1fd83) 97.46% compared to head (5826774) 97.46%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5841      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.46%   97.46%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          80       80              
  Lines       14822    14819       -3     
==========================================
- Hits        14447    14444       -3     
  Misses        375      375              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[jangorecki]

logicalAsInt we could move post release so revdeps (and non cran pkgs) have plenty of time to amend their code. Other looks good

[MichaelChirico]

Refined the GitHub search and confirmed there's only two places using logicalAsInt, neither of which have any activity for >5 years. Nevertheless filed downstream issues about the pending switch.

[jangorecki]

If packages were not active for 5 years, then it is more likely they will not manage to update their code within short period of 2 weeks that CRAN gives. Therefore we are risking this change to be reason for archival of two packages. I would say we should try to avoid doing so. Giving them time of full 1.15.99 cycle doesn't guarantee they will be fixed but at least feels more appropriate, as one of the goals of DT, even officially defined recently, is backward compatibility.

[MichaelChirico]

If packages were not active for 5 years, then it is more likely they will not manage to update their code within short period of 2 weeks that CRAN gives. Therefore we are risking this change to be reason for archival of two packages. I would say we should try to avoid doing so. Giving them time of full 1.15.99 cycle doesn't guarantee they will be fixed but at least feels more appropriate, as one of the goals of DT, even officially defined recently, is backward compatibility.

to be clear these are not CRAN packages, they are only maintained on GitHub.

[jangorecki]

It feels much safer then, yet not ideal.