Re: maturity and status and attributes, oh my!

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 bat***.

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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/