On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 02:11:31PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Olof Johansson <o...@lixom.net> wrote:
> > One problem that needs to be solved is obviously how a binding > > graduates from tentative to locked. This work isn't going to be very > > interesting to most people, I suspect. Think standards committee type > > work. > > I think a time based stabilization period would be better than a > separate directory to apply bindings too. Or time plus periodic review > perhaps. The only problem with a time-based versus separate directory is how do users who've downloaded the tree determine which bindings are stable? If they pull a tarball, or receive an SDK, there is most likely no git history attached. I think the idea of a 'tentative' directory (or 'locked') is churnish, but necessary. If I DL'd a tarball and had to type 'tentative' to get to the binding doc I wanted, that would be a pretty clear clue to be delicate about how I trust/use/plan with that binding. thx, Jason. -- 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/
