> On Mon, 14 May 2007, Bob Johnston wrote:
> > Alan Cox lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
> >
> > > > Why not just use the terms:
> > > > * outdated - as a replacement for "deprecated".
> > >
> > > Because they don't actually mean the same thing ?
> >
> > "superseded" would probably be a better word,
On Mon, 14 May 2007, Bob Johnston wrote:
> Alan Cox lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
>
> > > Why not just use the terms:
> > > * outdated - as a replacement for "deprecated".
> >
> > Because they don't actually mean the same thing ?
>
> "superseded" would probably be a better word, perhaps lacking th
Alan Cox lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
> > Why not just use the terms:
> > * outdated - as a replacement for "deprecated".
>
> Because they don't actually mean the same thing ?
"superseded" would probably be a better word, perhaps lacking the negative
connotations of "deprecated"
> > * toberemo
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Sun, 13 May 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On May 13 2007 12:32, Dave Jones wrote:
Despite repeated attempts over the last two and half years, this
driver seems somewhat persistant. Remove its deprecated status as
it has existing users who may not be in a position to
On Sun, 13 May 2007 23:01:51 + (UTC)
Bob Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan Richter s5r6.in-berlin.de> writes:
> > So why don't we simply say:
> >
> > - "Users of feature A are urged to migrate to alternative B."
> > - "Feature C will be removed in February 2038."
> >
> > Ever
Stefan Richter s5r6.in-berlin.de> writes:
> So why don't we simply say:
>
> - "Users of feature A are urged to migrate to alternative B."
> - "Feature C will be removed in February 2038."
>
> Everybody understands the meaning of /that/.
Why not just use the terms:
* outdated - as a replacem
Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> Am 13.05.2007 22:10 schrieb Stefan Richter:
>> So why don't we simply say:
>>
>> - "Users of feature A are urged to migrate to alternative B."
>> - "Feature C will be removed in February 2038."
>
> Because that's too long to add to a Kconfig tag line.
> You need a terse
Am 13.05.2007 22:10 schrieb Stefan Richter:
> So why don't we simply say:
>
> - "Users of feature A are urged to migrate to alternative B."
> - "Feature C will be removed in February 2038."
Because that's too long to add to a Kconfig tag line.
You need a terse label there.
--
Tilman Schmidt
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
>
>> Except that the term "obsolete" is already used differently in the
>> context of Linux kernel features; see Documentation/ABI/README.
>
> no, it isn't. in fact, it's used in that file *exactly* the way i've
> been defining
On Sun, 13 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Except that the term "obsolete" is already used differently in the
> context of Linux kernel features; see Documentation/ABI/README.
no, it isn't. in fact, it's used in that file *exactly* the way i've
been defining it:
"obsolete/"
"This directory d
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2007, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>> in short, do *not* remove its "deprecated" status. rather, remove its
>>> "obsolete" status and *make* it deprecated.
>> it is deprecated and obsolete.
>
> no, it's not. and,
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> p.s. before we get into this again where everyone thinks they know
> what they're talking about, i suggest consulting the official
> definitions of those two terms as defined at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/conform.html:
>
> Deprecated:
> --
[...]
> Obsolete:
>
On Sun, 13 May 2007, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > in short, do *not* remove its "deprecated" status. rather, remove its
> > "obsolete" status and *make* it deprecated.
>
> it is deprecated and obsolete.
no, it's not. and, trust me, no one on this list w
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> in short, do *not* remove its "deprecated" status. rather, remove its
> "obsolete" status and *make* it deprecated.
it is deprecated and obsolete.
Gruss
Bernd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a me
On Sun, 13 May 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On May 13 2007 12:32, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> >Despite repeated attempts over the last two and half years, this
> >driver seems somewhat persistant. Remove its deprecated status as
> >it has existing users who may not be in a position to migrate their
On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 06:35:45PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >- tristate "RAW driver (/dev/raw/rawN) (OBSOLETE)"
> >+ tristate "RAW driver (/dev/raw/rawN)"
> >depends on BLOCK
> >help
> >- The raw driver permits block devices to be bound to /dev/raw/rawN.
> >- Once
On May 13 2007 12:32, Dave Jones wrote:
>Despite repeated attempts over the last two and half years, this driver
>seems somewhat persistant. Remove its deprecated status as it has
>existing users who may not be in a position to migrate their apps
>to O_DIRECT.
>
>Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <[EMAI
17 matches
Mail list logo
