From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [tipc-discussion] [RFC: 2.6 patch] net/tipc/: possible cleanups Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:16:57 +0000 Message-ID: <20070223221657.GA10153@infradead.org> References: <20070124225850.GU17836@stusta.de> <45B8D5E8.1090308@ericsson.com> <20070223180612.GE12392@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jon Maloy , per.liden@ericsson.com, allan.stephens@windriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Adrian Bunk Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:60647 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933236AbXBWWSI (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:18:08 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070223180612.GE12392@stusta.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 07:06:12PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > >My impression is that most of this might have users that are not yet > > >submitted for inclusion in the kernel - one year after TIPC was merged. > > > > > > > > Not quite. The exported symbols belong to a public API for driver > > programmers. > > We know about several users of this API, and there will be more, but I > > don't think > > any of them are aspiring to have their code be included in the kernel. > >... > > Why not? > > The goal is to get as many drivers as possible included in the kernel. If we don't have any planned in-tree users for tipc we should simply drop tipc from the kernel entirely. No point to make our maintaince work harder for out of tree freeloaders.