Re: maturity and status and attributes, oh my!

[Jeff Garzik]

Stefan Richter wrote:
> But I can state requirements for the 'experimental' marker, from the POV
> of a volunteer driver support guy:
>   - Show it in big letters in the Kconfig prompt of an experimental
>     feature.
>   - Explain at appropriate place(s) what the particular caveats of the
>     feature are.
> That's it.  I am not aware of a need to evaluate this marker in routines
> which calculate the .config, unlike the 'broken' marker.

Correct.


> BTW, the requirements of communication in feature removal processes are
> similar to a degree.  But feature removal involves more active two-way
> communication and is tied to a schedule.

'deprecated' and 'obsolete' are very different beasts from the other 
statuses.  They are largely just a marker of opinion of the developer, 
and are largely treated as synonyms.

Code that was never marked deprecated nor obsolete often appears in 
Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, and eventually gets removed.

Feature deprecation and removal is a very amorphous concept that does 
not fit well at all into Kconfig markers, unlike experimental/broken.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/