linux-kernel - Re: so ... what *are* candidates for removal?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705020418530.7102@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Wed, 2 May 2007 04:28:04 -0400 (EDT)
From:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
To:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
cc:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, Andre Tomt <andre@...t.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: so ... what *are* candidates for removal?

On Wed, 2 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:

> Regarding features that are overdue for removal according to
> feature-removal-schedule.txt:
>
> I remember that at least one person used to watch for due dates for
> feature removal, wrote the removing patches, and sent them to the
> appropriate lists and maintainers.  This either got rid of the
> obsolete stuff, or it turned up reasons why some feature could not
> be removed just yet and how to update feature-removal-schedule.txt
> to correctly reflect that.
>
> So, as they say, Patches Are Welcome.

that's a nice idea, but it doesn't address the problem that someone
might go to the trouble to create such a patch and send it in, only to
have that submission generate shrieking along the lines of "OHMIGOD,
we can't delete that *yet*!!!"

that's the whole point of this wiki page:

http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Stuff_to_be_removed

it's meant for active participation to converge on a *consensus* as to
what should go and what shouldn't, *after* which the features removal
file can be updated appropriately and patches can start to be
generated.

it's incredibly wasteful to take the time to create and submit a
feature removal patch that ends up just *establishing* that something
shouldn't be deleted yet.  i'm sure most people here can think of
better things to do with their time.

rday
-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/