Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 19:26:31 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Code removal - Was Re: Future of the ie(4) driver Message-ID: <20070706022631.GQ1221@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <200707052245.l65MjpmR055403@fire.js.berklix.net> References: <200707051428.22766.jhb@freebsd.org> <200707052245.l65MjpmR055403@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian H. Stacey wrote this message on Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 00:45 +0200:
> John Baldwin wrote:
> > The ie(4) driver in 7.x has several issues. First of all, it has several
> > compiler warnings that haven't been successfully fixed in several years and
> > are currently just ignored. More importantly, it hasn't been updated to use
> > more modern FreeBSD APIs like bus_space (still uses inb/outb) and SMPng
> > locking. If someone is using this driver and is willing to test fixes for
> > it, then it can be updated. If there isn't anyone who is using this driver
> > and willing to test fixes, then it will be removed from the tree at some
> > point in the future (say a month or two).
>
> I reduced "cc: stable@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org" to current@
> & changed "Subject:" so as not to cross post this tangential reply.
> ( BTW I checked, I don't have any hardware that uses "ie" )
>
> What's concerned me increasingly for some time, (& nothing personal
> to any individual, (the above just a useful illustration ) is a
> tendency in FreeBSD for developers to say:
> ~Unless anyone speaks in [time] I will discard [whatever]~
> Then months later a new release is rolled, & months later users upgrade, &:
> "Oh my god! they removed the XYZ I use ! ... Aargh!~
>
> So when discarding, it seems best to adopt a policy to warn as
> wide a user base as possible, not just developers.
> Not just current@ or stable@ but at least all of hackers@.
I'm sorry, but are you saying that we now expect our regular users to
read -hackers? I would say that if we need to go beyond -current or
-stable, that we need to make it a regular news item.
> Even then we risk hurting happy users of FreeBSD, eg
> ISPs etc who just don't have time to read hackers@ every day.
>
> Maybe FreeBSD should have a low bandwidth mail list, that managers
> & busy admins could safely subscribe, so they get long warning
> of functional removal ? Such things as eg 16 bit PCMCIA removal
> (after 4.11 before 6.*) would have gone to such a list, etc.
Hmmm... If we batch these up, one per major branch, -announce wouldn't
be too bad...
> Good PR to keep wider user base informed of planned removals,
> & some otherwise unknowing users might then reply
> "OK, I'll install current/ stable on a spare box, & give
> developer(s) access, as I can't afford to lose functionality~
>
> PS Analogy:
> Opening programme in the "Hitch Hikers Guide To The Galaxy":
> The plan to demolish Arthur's house. on display in locked basement,
> The plan to demolish Earth, only filed on Alpha Centauri :-)
I'm sure even if we push it to a News item and send it out to
-announce there'll be someone who said, "Why didn't I get a personally
courriered letter to my home, my place of business and my vacation
home?"
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070706022631.GQ1221>