Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935274AbZJOSzb (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:55:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758572AbZJOSz3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:55:29 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36500 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756584AbZJOSz2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:55:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:46:56 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: david@lang.hm, Stefan Richter , linux-kernel , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: removing existing working drivers via staging Message-ID: <20091015184656.GA29858@suse.de> References: <200910151942.40259.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20091015174932.GA3595@suse.de> <200910152020.13080.bzolnier@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200910152020.13080.bzolnier@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2623 Lines: 57 On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 08:20:12PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On Thursday 15 October 2009 19:49:32 Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 07:42:40PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > On Thursday 15 October 2009 18:47:26 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 maintainer, for whatever reason, feels is obsolete / broken / 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. > > > > > > This is insanity and opens a door for various forms of abuse. > > > > What do you mean by this? What kind of "abuse"? > > Typical situation: > > You have driver for _really_ difficult hardware used by minority of total > users of a given subsystem. Said driver has no major problems except being > f*cking complicated (because of hardware) so it stays in the way of future > changes. > > With the current system people making bigger changes have to comprehend > that difficult stuff [*]. This is a good thing in the long-term since it > results in the better overall system understanding, better knowledge of > "DO's and DON'T's" and better users' experience. > > Now with the proposed scheme it is sufficient to throw said driver into > staging for few weeks and make future changes. Before users even notice > and complain they are screwed already since bringing the driver back is > no longer possible without big effort (+ subsystem is still evolving).. But a driver in staging still has to be able to build, api changes are not able to be ignored in it. > This will result in a "new kernel new hardware" world that some distro > people have been silently trying to accomplish and in this brave new world > few key people have way too much advantage over everyone else. I don't understand what you are referring to here. How about we take it one proposed (real) situation at a time here? If anyone objects to what is going on, please let me know. thanks, greg k-h -- 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/