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

Randy Dunlap
2008-09-25T17:54:18Z

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 07:49:23 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 14:27:26 +0900 Paul Mundt wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:59:03PM -0400, Parag Warudkar wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:06 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:
> > > > No, this is much different from EXPERIMENTAL. That flag is pretty much
> > > > useless right now. This is for a temporary landing place for drivers
> > > > that are not good enough to be merged, yet are useful enough for some
> > > > people to use.
> > >
> > > How? TAINT_EXPERIMENTAL (I'll stick to that, thanks :) and
> > > CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL are no different - neither to users nor to
> > > developers. Here is why -
> > > Both try to do the same thing - let people use the drivers on their
> > > own risk (as if the stable ones are developer's risk - but let's keep
> > > it aside for the moment) and give developers a chance to keep the code
> > > in sync with mainline and improve it per user problem reports or
> > > generally make it better.
> > >
> > Uhm.. not quite. As the one that proposed the flag in the first place,
> > perhaps it helps to cover the rationale (although Greg seems to have
> > mostly covered that already).
> >
> > EXPERIMENTAL today is pretty damn meaningless. What it tends to mean in
>
> then it would be better if Greg/someone cleaned up the current tree's
> problems instead of introducing more CRAP under a different name.
> Oh well, his mind is already made up and I know how difficult it is to
> change it.

I shouldn't have said that last sentence. I apologize to Greg.

ISTM that the real problems are (a) it's easier to introduce new staging/crap
than it is to fix EXPERIMENTAL and (b) no one wants to try to fix EXPERIMENTAL.

---
~Randy