Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:41:45 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] Squashfs pull request for 2.6.29 |
| |
* Kyle McMartin <kyle@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 03:04:57PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > > Why does it need to be upstream for someone to cut their teeth helping > > > out? > > Because people don't know where to look if it is out-of-the tree. > > Seriously, if it can't be easily found, it's not fixed up. Proof of > > that is the hundreds of out-of-tree drivers that I have found over the > > past months. > > What about the hundreds of utterly crap drivers we have *right now* in > the kernel? Just because something is distributed with the kernel does > *not* mean it will get cleaned up. There's hundreds of counterexamples > to that. If you think moving some of them to drivers/staging to increase > the "visibility" to people looking for low hanging fruit, I can generate > a list...
that is true and it does not contradict the purpose and intention of drivers/staging/ though - it extends it.
We could create drivers/staging/in/ and drivers/staging/out/.
So instead of marking drivers CONFIG_BROKEN we could move them to drivers/staging/out/ - and if they dont get 'saved' within a kernel release they will be zapped for good. That is more gradual than a sudden 'remove a driver completely' action.
Ingo
| |