On Wed, 2 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote: > Regarding features that are overdue for removal according to > feature-removal-schedule.txt: > > I remember that at least one person used to watch for due dates for > feature removal, wrote the removing patches, and sent them to the > appropriate lists and maintainers. This either got rid of the > obsolete stuff, or it turned up reasons why some feature could not > be removed just yet and how to update feature-removal-schedule.txt > to correctly reflect that. > > So, as they say, Patches Are Welcome.
that's a nice idea, but it doesn't address the problem that someone might go to the trouble to create such a patch and send it in, only to have that submission generate shrieking along the lines of "OHMIGOD, we can't delete that *yet*!!!" that's the whole point of this wiki page: http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Stuff_to_be_removed it's meant for active participation to converge on a *consensus* as to what should go and what shouldn't, *after* which the features removal file can be updated appropriately and patches can start to be generated. it's incredibly wasteful to take the time to create and submit a feature removal patch that ends up just *establishing* that something shouldn't be deleted yet. i'm sure most people here can think of better things to do with their time. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page ======================================================================== - 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/
