[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46479440.3060305@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 00:42:08 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
CC: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@...a.inka.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: undeprecate raw driver.
Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> Am 13.05.2007 22:10 schrieb Stefan Richter:
>> So why don't we simply say:
>>
>> - "Users of feature A are urged to migrate to alternative B."
>> - "Feature C will be removed in February 2038."
>
> Because that's too long to add to a Kconfig tag line.
> You need a terse label there.
Then put "DEPRECATED" there, because you deprecate the enabling of the
option.
However, actual users of such a kernel option need the full explanation
of what's wrong with the option in order to decide whether to switch it
off. The terse label alone is *insufficient*. It's insufficient even
if you develop a scheme with two or more different labels for different
flavors of deprecation. In fact, generically defined finer-grained
flavors of "deprecated" will be too fine-grained to be sensibly used in
/real/ feature removal processes.
It doesn't lead us anywhere to discuss about deprecation on an abstract
level. Discuss concrete features (like the raw driver) with the people
who used that feature --- only then you get to know how to proceed with
that feature appropriately.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== -=-= -===-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists