From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: Scheduled removals Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:32:36 +0100 Message-ID: <496AC7E4.6080204@trash.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Netfilter Developer Mailing List To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:55060 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751066AbZALEcy (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:32:54 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > as per Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, some legacy code is > ripe for removal. Now while pursuing this I wondered whether the struct > definitions for the old code in the header files (e.g. in > linux/netfilter/xt_CONNMARK.h) can also be removed or whether people > will argue that doing so would unnecessarily cause dismay on behalf the > potential users (of which there are not any). I am not aware of any > users, and neither is Search Engine Google, so I'd just take the bait > and kill it. Vetoes? Every time I'm searching I do find some users of at least some iptables headers. Maybe not this specific one, but that doesn't mean much, fact is there might be users. That being said, I'd be fine removing both the functionality and the headers after a sufficiently long period. I'm not really confident that the period has indeed be long enough though. When did we schedule this for removal?