![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 07:15:49 +0300, Al Boldi said: > I don't think there is a lack of heuristics, nor is there a lack of > discussion. What is needed, is a realization of the problem. > > IOW, respective tree-owners need to come to a realization of the state of > their trees, problem or not. If it has a problem, that problem needs to be > fixed or backed out of stable and moved into dev. I keep trying to parse this, and it keeps coming up as "content-free". For starters, you don't even have a useful definition of "has a problem". There's a whole *range* of definitions for that, and even skilled and respected members of the Linux kernel community can disagree about whether something is "a problem". For example, see the thread about a week ago about "Remove hotplug cpu crap from cpufreq". If, given a *specific* feature with high wart quotient, we can't agree on whether it needs to be fixed or backed out, we're doomed to fail if we start handwaving about problems "in general". As a group, we suck at anything that isn't specific, like "Algorithm A is better than B for case XYZ". [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-11-11 06:35 [W:15.873 / U:0.110 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||