On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/06/2014 02:31 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> >
> > How do we usually do that? Do we add a big fat warning for anyone who is
> > using it for a few releases or just yank support out entirely and see if
> > we're surprised?
> >
>
> We don't really *have* a good way of deprecation, this is the problem.
> Usually it doesn't happen until we find out that a bug snuck its way in
> and "X hasn't worked for N releases now, and noone has noticed."
> Voyager was finally killed off because the maintainer of the port was
> unwilling to keep up with the mainstream kernel flux. The i386 explicit
> deprecation was definitely one of the more high-profile removals of a
> largely working port, and was a (brief) Kernel Summit topic.
>
> I would love to see NumaQ, VisWS, Summit and ES7000 just nuked. In
> fact, I'm thinking that unless someone steps up and explicitly claims
> ownership of those platforms by adding their name to MAINTAINERS (or
> reiterating them in the case of VisWS, which MAINTAINERS entry says "for
> 2.6") we should just rip them all out.
>
> Anyone who wants to disagree?
Anyone who disagrees is automatically appointed to fill in the vacancy
in that section of the maintainers file:
PALEONTOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
M: vacant@paleontological.systems
S: reanimation
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
