public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 	  maintainer, for whatever reason, feels is obsolete / broken /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.

  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