Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:32:30 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: removing existing working drivers via staging |
| |
* Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> On Thu 2009-10-15 09:47:26, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 09:39:51AM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote: > > > however, what I think I saw proposed was to move drivers that need to be > > > 'cleaned up', to staging and then dropping them if they don't get cleaned. > > > > What is "proposed" is the following: > > > > - For drivers currently in the kernel tree, that the subsystem > > maintainer, for whatever reason, feels is obsolete / broken / > > needs major cleaning / wants to get rid of, can be submitted > > to the staging maintainer to be moved to the drivers/staging/ > > directory. > > - For a file to be moved into this directory, all of the normal > > staging rules apply, including most importantly, a TODO file > > listing what needs to be done to the driver in order for it to > > be moved back into the main portion of the kernel tree. > > - If, after a period of 3 releases, no work has been done on the > > driver by anyone, the driver will be removed from the staging > > tree, just like all drivers in the staging tree. > > > > Note, as always, if a driver wants to come back from removal of the > > staging tree, a simple email to the staging maintainer, along with the > > promise that work will be done, is all it takes to resurrect it. > > > > Sound good? > > > > Now, where to put these "rules"? Any suggestions? > > I'm not sure it sounds good. It should not be named 'staging' at > least.
Why not? It's a good match - a driver gets staged because it's not fit for upstream.
The usual staging rules apply regardless of where the driver came from (outside or inside the kernel): someone has to care about it and it has to be fixed.
Ingo
| |