Re: [2.6 patch] remove CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 02:30:22PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 15:26:23 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > * Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > This patch removes the EXPERIMENTAL option and all dependencies on 
> > > EXPERIMENTAL since they are pointless.
> > 
> > agreed. CONFIG_BROKEN has real use - but CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL is pretty 
> > pointless in the 90-days kernel development model.
> 
> Then I need a replacement equivalent for the ATA layer and all the other
> drivers using it to indicate stuff that *IS* experimental, or not yet
> known to be highly robust. Drivers are not the same as core code Ingo and
> the world driver writers live in is very different to the one you operate
> in as is clearly shown by this and by the _p discussion.
> 
> Still NAK.  As the alternative is
> 
> CONFIG_ATA_EXPERIMENTAL, CONFIG_NET_EXPERIMENTAL,
> CONFIG_VIDEO_EXPERIMENTAL, ... all being added by developers

But this alternative is actually _better_.

The point is that e.g. a user having to enable CONFIG_ATA_EXPERIMENTAL 
for getting his hardware supported does not necessarily want to see 
options for experimental congestion control algorithms that might be 
made available by CONFIG_NET_EXPERIMENTAL.

> We will also need experimental badly in future when the EU liability
> rules (and probably the US ones in a similar time scale) change so that
> liability applies to software, because then it will be very important to
> clearly label code that is experimental or development code as such.

Whatever that will imply for free software projects is something 
completely different from what our current CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL
mess does.

> Alan

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed