Re: [GIT PULL] Squashfs pull request for 2.6.29

[Randy Dunlap]

Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 08:30:18AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> 
>  > I was wanting to stick with drivers to start with, but I really have no
>  > objection to adding filesystems, if they are self-contained, to the
>  > drivers/staging/ directory.
>  > 
>  > I looked at adding squashfs, but at the time, it touched other portions
>  > of the kernel which wouldn't have made it a good canidate for staging.
>  > This was later resolved, and now that it is merged, it's a moot issue :)
>  > 
>  > So, if anyone wants to send me filesystems, I'll be glad to take them
>  > into drivers/staging, as long as they are self-contained (novfs for
>  > example would fit this category.)
> 
> Filesystems in staging worries me.
> 
> * The number of people who competently review filesystem code
>   (and I mean real review here, not checkpatch & codingstyle crap)
>   is significantly less than those who review drivers.
>   I foresee stuff just lingering there for years.
>   (Look how long fs stuff hangs around unmerged in -mm for example).
>  
> * The fallout of staging is already starting to drift into distros.
>   Within a week of Fedora shipping a kernel that had staging/
>   we had requests to enable drivers from it.
>   And of course, those drivers were garbage.
>   This is only going to increase as time goes on.
> 
> * For crap drivers that a minority cares about, this isn't a big deal
>   to tell the users "build it yourself, we don't support it when stuff breaks".
>   (And a lot of that crap will break.  NetworkManager won't work properly
>    with some of the wireless crap in staging for example), but by
>   continually adding to the shitpile the potential for review dramatically
>   gets reduced, and for something as critical as a filesystem, I find this
>   absolutely terrifying from a support perspective.
> 
> I don't mean to piss on your parade, but from my viewpoint, staging
> is a trainwreck so far, and I'd hate to see it get worse.
> 
> We've already demonstrated "look how much stuff we can merge" time and
> time again, but no-one ever seems to have a proposal for how we increase
> the amount of review code gets before it's merged.
> 
> There's lowering the barrier for entry, and there's not having a barrier at all.
> The latter is what I'm concerned that staging/ has become.

I agree.  Alexey D. asked about that a few days ago and the Greg's answer
about what he would accept was "anything".  Ugh ugh ugh.  I did not like
that reply at all.

I agree that crap is the right name for lots of it.  For the ones that
people & distros care about, someone should step up and do some real
work on them.



~Randy
--
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/