From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
Cc: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: maturity and status and attributes, oh my!
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 13:22:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070901172231.GA28391@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709010533260.29190@localhost.localdomain>
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:41:06AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> this whole attribute thing is not adding anything breathtaking new,
> it's simply taking the example set by EXPERIMENTAL and generalizing
> it and making it more convenient in the process.
The problem I see with this whole maturity levels idea is that you've
missed that 'EXPERIMENTAL' is largely a complete failure because
everyone ends up enabling it due to needing something dependant on it.
People just don't care about how mature an option is if they need
a driver/feature. *No-one* is going to come across options and think
"Oh, the driver for my network card isn't stable. Guess I'll not enable it".
And the idea of hiding the options behind multiple levels of
maturity options sounds completely batshit.
Introducing multiple levels of EXPERIMENTAL is just introducing
more symbols of zero value because everyone will end up enabling
them just to get things done.
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-01 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-31 21:38 maturity and status and attributes, oh my! Robert P. J. Day
2007-08-31 22:02 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-01 6:35 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-09-01 9:06 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-08-31 22:36 ` Stefan Richter
2007-09-01 1:23 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 9:14 ` Stefan Richter
2007-09-01 9:21 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 9:47 ` Stefan Richter
2007-09-01 9:54 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 13:14 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-09-01 13:53 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-01 10:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-01 10:52 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 11:06 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-01 13:44 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2007-09-01 13:52 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-01 14:27 ` Stefan Richter
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709010435070.26137@localhost.localdomain>
2007-09-01 9:27 ` Stefan Richter
2007-09-01 9:41 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 17:22 ` Dave Jones [this message]
2007-09-01 17:58 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 18:06 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 18:24 ` Dave Jones
2007-08-31 23:02 ` Dave Jones
2007-09-01 8:34 ` Robert P. J. Day
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-08-31 23:29 Mitchell Erblich
2007-09-01 1:33 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-01 6:39 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-09-01 7:02 ` Robert P. J. Day
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070901172231.GA28391@redhat.com \
--to=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rpjday@mindspring.com \
--cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox