On Tuesday 20 February 2007 17:27, Tilman Schmidt wrote: > On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 19:35:07 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > I think that the patch is useful and that the distinction between > > DEPRECATED and OBSOLETE options is quite clear: > > > > * DEPRECATED == new better code is available, old code scheduled for removal > > > > * OBSOLETE == no replacement yet but the code is broken by design > > and unreliable, not scheduled for removal yet > > Is that really the consensus on these definitions? I thought it was > more or less the opposite: > > * DEPRECATED == no (complete) replacement available yet, but it has > been decided that this code is less than optimal and alternatives > should be preferred > > * OBSOLETE == replacement available, no reason to use this code anymore
Indeed, this way it makes more sense for me but I'll leave the definitive answer to a native speaker(s). Bart - 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/
