On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 23:42 +0200, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> On 01.06.2011 16:28, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Greg Stein wrote on Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 10:22:51 -0400:
> >> On Jun 1, 2011 10:09 AM, "Stefan Sperling"<stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 09:57:24AM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> >>>> I had a define in workqueue.c that somebody recently prefixed with SVN_.
> >>> That was me.
> >>>
> >>>> I never intended it to be part of *any* API. just a little helper for us
> >> devs.
> >>>> Yet now it shows up in knobs, and is an "official API"?!?
> >>>>
> >>>> Seems we may want to reconsider how stuff magically becomes a "knob".
> >>> I don't really see the point of documenting this define in notes/knobs
> >>> either. Should I move this back to a file-private define that isn't
> >>> documented in knobs?
> >> No need to rename it (either name would be valid in that file), but yanking
> >> it from knobs makes sense to me.
> >>
> > knobs can list both public and developer-only macros... if we want it to
> > list just public macros let's rm the file and add a section to the
> > doxygen docs.
> >
> I copied the "SVN_ prefix makes it public" statement from
> Daniel's original knobs file.
>
> IMHO, however, the intention of that file is to serve as a
> central point of reference to svn devs. I suggest that we
> simply remove said statement and replace it with a "this
> is SVN-dev-private information" disclaimer.
>
> An enthusiastic user may still take the information in that
> file to find out "what if" but I consider it a tool - not a commitment.
+1.
- Julian
Received on 2011-06-02 10:37:42 CEST