Problems with kernel updates needing non-kernel changes

[Jeremy Katz]

On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 14:21 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> Jon Masters wrote:
> > Indeed. And options that are removed *must* be supported for a while. We
> > can't have modules that loaded previously now failing just because the
> > maintainer decided to remove a previously valid option without warning.
> > This needs strong upstream coercion on the part of those taking patches.
> 
> We can always put the option back in the module just to make it load,
> but I really don't want to be doing that all the time. Maybe I could
> write patches that put the options back and just make them print a
> warning saying the option is no longer valid, then send them upstream.
> Maybe after a few iterations of that people will get the point?

Sounds like exactly the right answer to me!

Jeremy