From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jason@lakedaemon.net (Jason Cooper) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:31:35 -0400 Subject: DT bindings as ABI [was: Do we have people interested in device tree janitoring / cleanup?] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130725193135.GT23879@titan.lakedaemon.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 02:11:31PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: > > One problem that needs to be solved is obviously how a binding > > graduates from tentative to locked. This work isn't going to be very > > interesting to most people, I suspect. Think standards committee type > > work. > > I think a time based stabilization period would be better than a > separate directory to apply bindings too. Or time plus periodic review > perhaps. The only problem with a time-based versus separate directory is how do users who've downloaded the tree determine which bindings are stable? If they pull a tarball, or receive an SDK, there is most likely no git history attached. I think the idea of a 'tentative' directory (or 'locked') is churnish, but necessary. If I DL'd a tarball and had to type 'tentative' to get to the binding doc I wanted, that would be a pretty clear clue to be delicate about how I trust/use/plan with that binding. thx, Jason.