API review for 1.11; do we need to mark new APIs as experimental?

The following public APIs are new or revved since 1.10:

svn_client_layout_func_t
svn_client_layout_list
  - New for 'viewspec' output; marked 'experimental'.

svn_client_diff7
svn_client_diff_peg7
  - Adds a 'pretty_print_mergeinfo' option.

svn_client_revert4
svn_wc_revert6
  - Adds an 'added_keep_local' option.

svn_client_conflict_option_id_t
  - 3 new enumerators.

svn_client_shelf_*
  - Marked 'experimental'.

SVN_OPT_MAX_PARAGRAPHS
svn_opt_subcommand_desc3_t
svn_opt_get_canonical_subcommand3
svn_opt_get_option_from_code3
svn_opt_subcommand_takes_option4
svn_opt_print_generic_help3
svn_opt_subcommand_help4
svn_opt_print_help5
  - For multi-paragraph command-line help text.

** QUESTION **

We recently decided that only APIs released in an LTS release will be subject to our compatibility guarantees. As 1.11 is not an LTS release, the above APIs will not be subject to those guarantees (until they appear in an LTS).

Do we need to do anything in the source code to emphasize that, for the ones that are not already marked 'experimental'? If so, what? Mark them 'experimental' in addition to their existing annotations (which probably would mean we'd want to turn off the warnings about use of experimental APIs in our own builds), or something else?

We should certainly mention this explicitly in the 1.11 release notes.

-- 
- Julian