Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable?

Tilman Schmidt
2007-04-17T13:13:14Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1381 bytes --]

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:13:37 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 00:39:10 +0200 Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>
>> We *did* reach a consensus that isdn4linux is not obsolete in the
>> accepted sense of the word, because there is no replacement for it
>> so far.
>>
>> OTOH I have since submitted (twice, in fact) a patch that would remove
>> the "(obsolete)" label from the Kconfig entry, but somehow nothing
>> ever became of it. My submissions just linger in LKML, uncommented and
>> unmerged.
>
> Did you submit the patch to Andrew Morton?

No. The recipients I chose were Karsten Keil as the subsystem
maintainer, i4ldeveloper as the subsystem specific list, and LKML.

> Is the patch in the -mm patchset?

No. Should it be? It's not as if there was anything to test.
It's purely a textual change in Kconfig messages.

> Did Karsten ack the patch?

No. He hasn't replied at all.

> If the patch is in -mm and it's not critical (like this subject),
> then it probably won't be merged until after 2.6.21 is released...

Fine by me, as long as it does get merged eventually so I can stop
watching for attempts to remove isdn4linux as obsolete.

--
Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc
Bonn, Germany
Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite)

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 250 bytes --]