lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: maturity and status and attributes, oh my!
Stefan Richter wrote:
> But I can state requirements for the 'experimental' marker, from the POV
> of a volunteer driver support guy:
> - Show it in big letters in the Kconfig prompt of an experimental
> feature.
> - Explain at appropriate place(s) what the particular caveats of the
> feature are.
> That's it. I am not aware of a need to evaluate this marker in routines
> which calculate the .config, unlike the 'broken' marker.

Correct.


> BTW, the requirements of communication in feature removal processes are
> similar to a degree. But feature removal involves more active two-way
> communication and is tied to a schedule.

'deprecated' and 'obsolete' are very different beasts from the other
statuses. They are largely just a marker of opinion of the developer,
and are largely treated as synonyms.

Code that was never marked deprecated nor obsolete often appears in
Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, and eventually gets removed.

Feature deprecation and removal is a very amorphous concept that does
not fit well at all into Kconfig markers, unlike experimental/broken.

Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-09-01 12:45    [W:0.104 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site