Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging)

Greg KH
2008-09-25T20:57:00Z

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 07:02:28AM -0400, Parag Warudkar wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:
>
> >
> > It is not different, except by name only. Don't bike-shed :)
>
> The whole concept is a bike shed - disproportionate importance to
> labeling same things with different name.
> So it should come as no surprise that we are discussing the need for
> trivial duplications.

Heh, ok, so the basic premise of getting code that is not currently in
mergable shape into the tree earlier to get wider usage and testing is
something that you agree with?

If so, we can arm-wrestle over what to call it, one name is as good as
another, as long as we don't overload a currently used name like
EXPERIMENTAL, which Paul has so well explained is a mess right now. And
I don't have the inclination to clean up that mess right now, I'm more
worried about bigger messes like these 15 horrible drivers I'm currently
sitting on in -staging.

If not, please let me know your objections.

thanks,

greg "green! The bikeshed must be green!" k-h