Re: [patch] kill off PC9800

[Matt Mackall]

On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 04:23:18PM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> Matt Mackall wrote:
> 
> >On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 02:21:23PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> >>James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>>   Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>   >
> >>>   >  PC9800 sub-arch is incomplete, hackish (at least in IDE), 
> >>>   maintainers
> >>>   >  don't reply to emails and haven't touched it in awhile.
> >>>   
> >>>   And the hardware is obsolete, isn't it?  Does anyone know when they 
> >>>   were
> >>>   last manufactured, and how popular they are?
> >>>   
> >>>Hey, just being obsolete is no grounds for eliminating a
> >>>subarchitecture...
> >>
> >>Well it's a question of whether we're likely to see increasing demand for
> >>it in the future.  If so then it would be prudent to put some effort into
> >>fixing it up rather than removing it.
> >>
> >>Seems that's not the case.  I don't see a huge rush on this but if after
> >>this discussion nobody steps up to take care of the code over the next few
> >>weeks, it's best to remove it.
> >
> >
> >Perhaps a nicer way to do this is to add a compile warning or error:
> >
> >#warning "arch/i386/mach-pc9800 unmaintained since xx/xx/xx, nominated
> >for removal xx/xx/xx if unclaimed"
> >
> >..where the second date is, say, 3+ months after the warning goes in.
> >Then people can nominate stuff for removal with one liners and users
> >will get ample opportunity to complain.
> >
> 
> You're missing the point that this code doesn't compile *at all*. 
> Nobody would ever see the warning.

Actually it's a matter of fail to attempt to compile, which is
different than fail to compile. The principle is the same - stick
advance notice in a highly visible place where users are likely to see
it. That place is _not_ this mailing list.

We've had the code for years, and it would be nice to delete it if
it's truly dead. But it seems silly to wake up one morning and say "no
one's touched it for a year" and post a patch to delete it that same
day. If it wasn't urgent yesterday, then why is it urgent today?

-- 
Matt Mackall : http://www.selenic.com : Linux development and consulting
-
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/