LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Davidsen <>
To: "Robert P. J. Day" <>,
	Linux Kernel mailing List <>
Subject: Re: "obsolete" versus "deprecated", and a new config option?
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:13:45 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701171134440.1878@CPE00045a9c397f-CM001225dbafb6>

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>   a couple random thoughts on the notion of obsolescence and
> deprecation.

	[...horrible example deleted...]

>   so is that ioctl obsolete or deprecated?  those aren't the same
> things, a good distinction being drawn here by someone discussing
> devfs:
> "Devfs is deprecated.  This means it's still available but you should
> consider moving to other options when available.  Obsolete means it
> shouldn't be used.  Some 2.6 docs have confused these two terms WRT
> devfs."
>   yes, and that confusion continues to this day, when a single feature
> is described as both deprecated and obsolete.  not good.  (also, i'm
> guessing that anything that's "obsolete" might deserve a default of
> "n" rather than "y", but that's just me.  :-)

Agree on that. I would hope "obsolete" means there's a newer way which 
should provide the functionality (** help should say where that is **) 
while depreciated should mean "we decided this was a bad solution" or 
something like that.
>   in any event, what about introducing a new config variable,
> OBSOLETE, under "Code maturity level options"?  this would seem to be
> a quick and dirty way to prune anything that is *supposed* to be
> obsolete from the build, to make sure you're not picking up dead code
> by accident.

If you're doing that, why not four variables, for incomplete, 
experimental, obsolete and depreciated? Unfortunately doing any more 
detailed nomenclature would be a LOT of work!
>   i think it would be useful to be able to make that kind of
> distinction since, as the devfs writer pointed out above, the point of
> labelling something "obsolete" is not to *discourage* someone from
> using a feature, it's to imply that they *shouldn't* be using that
> feature.  period.  which suggests there should be an easy, one-step
> way to enforce that absolutely in a build.
>   thoughts?
I think it's a good idea, but doing it right may be more work than the 
benefit justifies.

bill davidsen <>
   CTO TMR Associates, Inc
   Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

  reply	other threads:[~2007-01-17 18:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-17 16:51 Robert P. J. Day
2007-01-17 18:13 ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2007-01-17 18:42   ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-01-17 21:54 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-01-17 22:04   ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-01-17 22:54     ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-01-17 22:51       ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-01-18 21:37         ` H. Peter Anvin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: "obsolete" versus "deprecated", and a new config option?' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).