On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 10:40:12PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > There isn't any hard semantics behind what is marked EXPERIMENTAL and
> > what not. In it's current state, we could even consider removing the
> > EXPERIMENTAL option and all dependencies on EXPERIMENTAL.
>
> Well I do know at least some of the things that depend on experimental
> are legitimate.
>
> I wonder if the problem is that we don't police experimental well
> enough.
>
> > Currently CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=n would cost a distribution a three digit
> > number of device drivers plus several features like e.g. NFSv4.
>
> I can see a distribution carefully cherry picking things, that the
> have an intimate knowledge about out of experimental but it doesn't
> sound right for taking things out of EXPERIMENTAL to be routine.
>
> I know I'm a little slow about getting around to it but when ever I
> have a feature that isn't EXPERIMENTAL anymore I remove the tag.
Part of the picture might be that code that was included into the kernel
usually is in a state that it works at least most time for most of the
people.
And when you think about distributions, it's hard to imagine why a
distribution should not enable more or less all EXPERIMENTAL device
drivers - an EXPERIMENTAL driver is much better than no driver for this
hardware at all.
> Eric
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
