On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 02:06:22PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > > People just don't care about how mature an option is if they need
> > > a driver/feature. *No-one* is going to come across options and
> > > think "Oh, the driver for my network card isn't stable. Guess I'll
> > > not enable it". And the idea of hiding the options behind multiple
> > > levels of maturity options sounds completely batshit.
>
> by the way and just for the record, dave, you have the above
> completely backwards. the default for what you would be allowed to
> select or deselect would be *everything*. what this whole maturity
> level thing would allow you to do is selectively *deselect* (or
> *filter*) what is displayed. in short, if you do nothing, you see no
> effect.
>From your earlier mail..
"all this new construct is doing is implementing a new way to globally
select or de-select large sets of kernel features to display for user
selection, in exactly the way that EXPERIMENTAL does it now, that's all."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
EXPERIMENTAL hides options.
> so i don't mind folks criticizing the proposal. but it sure would be
> nice if they understood what they were criticising, know what i mean?
Quite.
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
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/
