Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

Scott Long wrote:
> Q wrote:
> 
>> Don't overreact.
> 
> 
> Heh.  I live this hell every day with Linux in my day job.
> 
>> I'm not suggesting taking the linux approach of
>> versioning every module. But rather allowing the loader or a module
>> (most likely a 3rd part or from a port) the ability to make a decision
>> based on some internal revision/date based "version" as to whether it is
>> safe to proceed to load.
> 
> 
> Ideally, every API would be versioned, and developers would be careful
> to architect their work so that the interfaces would be stable and
> gratuitous incompatibilities would be avoided.  Alas, that is not always
> the case.
> 
NO no and again no. This would repeat the same design mistake
that is already in Linux. On API level you DO NOT WANT versioning.
What you really want is: type signature cheking. Like for example
done through C++ symbol mangling rules. If you can't do it like that
then better leave it off as it is. Versioning in itself
helps literally nothing and introduces many many problems in esp.
if you are using a "vendor supplied" kernel and are trying to
deploy add on modules - which is about the only point in time
where you need to care about versioning.