From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
Cc: david@lang.hm, Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>,
"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: removing existing working drivers via staging
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:58:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200910152058.33114.bzolnier@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091015184656.GA29858@suse.de>
On Thursday 15 October 2009 20:46:56 Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 08:20:12PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Thursday 15 October 2009 19:49:32 Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 07:42:40PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 15 October 2009 18:47:26 Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 09:39:51AM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:
> > > > > > however, what I think I saw proposed was to move drivers that need to be
> > > > > > 'cleaned up', to staging and then dropping them if they don't get cleaned.
> > > > >
> > > > > What is "proposed" is the following:
> > > > >
> > > > > - For drivers currently in the kernel tree, that the subsystem
> > > > > maintainer, for whatever reason, feels is obsolete / broken /
> > > > > needs major cleaning / wants to get rid of, can be submitted
> > > > > to the staging maintainer to be moved to the drivers/staging/
> > > > > directory.
> > > >
> > > > This is insanity and opens a door for various forms of abuse.
> > >
> > > What do you mean by this? What kind of "abuse"?
> >
> > Typical situation:
> >
> > You have driver for _really_ difficult hardware used by minority of total
> > users of a given subsystem. Said driver has no major problems except being
> > f*cking complicated (because of hardware) so it stays in the way of future
> > changes.
> >
> > With the current system people making bigger changes have to comprehend
> > that difficult stuff [*]. This is a good thing in the long-term since it
> > results in the better overall system understanding, better knowledge of
> > "DO's and DON'T's" and better users' experience.
> >
> > Now with the proposed scheme it is sufficient to throw said driver into
> > staging for few weeks and make future changes. Before users even notice
> > and complain they are screwed already since bringing the driver back is
> > no longer possible without big effort (+ subsystem is still evolving)..
>
> But a driver in staging still has to be able to build, api changes are
> not able to be ignored in it.
Sure, it will build at the of being submitted to staging..
> > This will result in a "new kernel new hardware" world that some distro
> > people have been silently trying to accomplish and in this brave new world
> > few key people have way too much advantage over everyone else.
>
> I don't understand what you are referring to here.
See my PM.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-15 19:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-15 5:27 removing existing working drivers via staging david
2009-10-15 16:33 ` Stefan Richter
2009-10-15 16:39 ` david
2009-10-15 16:47 ` Greg KH
2009-10-15 17:42 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-10-15 17:49 ` Greg KH
2009-10-15 18:20 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-10-15 18:46 ` Greg KH
2009-10-15 18:58 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2009-10-15 19:02 ` david
2009-10-15 19:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-15 19:38 ` david
2009-10-15 19:47 ` Stefan Richter
2009-10-15 19:57 ` david
2009-10-27 4:23 ` david
2009-10-27 5:22 ` David Miller
2009-10-27 5:50 ` david
2009-10-27 14:06 ` Greg KH
2009-10-27 10:45 ` Alan Cox
2009-10-16 7:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-16 7:58 ` Justin P. Mattock
2009-10-15 19:40 ` Stefan Richter
2009-10-15 19:49 ` david
2009-10-15 20:56 ` Greg KH
2009-10-16 7:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-15 18:44 ` Alan Cox
2009-10-15 19:24 ` David Miller
2009-10-17 17:27 ` Pavel Machek
2009-10-19 7:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-19 7:40 ` Greg KH
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=200910152058.33114.bzolnier@gmail.com \
--to=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=david@lang.hm \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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