[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m14pgdtbkj.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:40:12 -0600
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, kir@...oft.com,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, kir@...nvz.org,
Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH] pidns: Place under CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL (take 2)
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> writes:
> There isn't any hard semantics behind what is marked EXPERIMENTAL and
> what not. In it's current state, we could even consider removing the
> EXPERIMENTAL option and all dependencies on EXPERIMENTAL.
Well I do know at least some of the things that depend on experimental
are legitimate.
I wonder if the problem is that we don't police experimental well
enough.
> Currently CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=n would cost a distribution a three digit
> number of device drivers plus several features like e.g. NFSv4.
I can see a distribution carefully cherry picking things, that the
have an intimate knowledge about out of experimental but it doesn't
sound right for taking things out of EXPERIMENTAL to be routine.
I know I'm a little slow about getting around to it but when ever I
have a feature that isn't EXPERIMENTAL anymore I remove the tag.
Eric
-
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