Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> writes: > Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> writes: > >> On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 04:30:08PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >>> The hub supports only USB 1.1. When running out of usb ports it is in >>> almost all cases the much better choice to add another usb host adapter >>> (or increase the number of root ports when using xhci) instead of using >>> the usb hub. >> >> Is that actually a strong enough reason to delete this device though ? >> This reads like its merely something we don't expect to be commonly >> used, rather than something we would actively want to delete. > > This does seem quite aggressive because there may be cases when users > explicitly want to use old devices. Maybe there is need for a third > state (better_alternatives?) so we can steer users away from old command > lines they may have picked up from the web to the modern alternative?
What exactly do we mean when we call something deprecated? For me, it means "you should not normally use this". Important special case: "because we intend to remove it." But there can be other cases, say "because <alternative> will serve you better".
