On 5/8/21 2:22 am, Christian Mauderer wrote: > On 04/08/2021 18:09, Gedare Bloom wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 9:05 AM Christian MAUDERER >> <christian.maude...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: >>> Am 04.08.21 um 16:55 schrieb Gedare Bloom: >>>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 4:18 AM Christian MAUDERER >>>> <christian.maude...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: >>>> My preference would be to leave the legacy doc where it is, >>> >>> Just a comment for that point: I know that the doc has been moved around >>> a bit. But I think we should try to get all similar options onto the >>> same "level". Otherwise if a user searches for "How to do networking >>> with RTEMS" and he finds https://docs.rtems.org/ the only manual with >>> "Networking" is the legacy stack. If it is on the same page (level, >>> hirarchie, ...) like the headline "libbsd Networking and other cool >>> stuff" or "lwIP", a user instantly can see that there is more than one >>> option. >>> >> >> That's a good point, but I want to keep the legacy stack separate from >> the rest of the documentation to make it simpler to deprecate/obsolete >> it. I don't see value in moving it, just to kill it in the next >> release. AFAIK, we will strongly discourage anyone from using it in >> rtems-6, and I'd like to kill it off moving forward once we feel >> confident that lwIP is feasible for us to maintain. Your point about >> marketing is well-taken though. > > OK. I didn't expect that we are that far that we already plan to (maybe) > remove > it in the next release. In that case I agree: It's not worth the effort to > move it. >
Should something be added to the legacy manual indicating it's status? Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
