Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Call it "fallback" or "simple" or something that shows the intent, but > > no, I'm not taking patches that introduce a _new_ interface and call > > it "deprecated". Yeah, I'll change it to "fallback" - I started talking about it like that in the docs anyway. > Put another way: to call something "deprecated", you have to already > have the replacement all ready to go. We're not far off. There's a fair distance (in number of patches) between this patchset and the completion, hence why I marked them as deprecated here, intending to remove them at the end. Between myself, Jeff and Dave we have fscache, cachefiles, afs, ceph and nfs (almost) covered. I have patches for 9p and I've given a partial patch for cifs to Steve and Shyam. David
