Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:55:14 -0800 | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Subject | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| |
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:40:29 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > > Do you believe that our response to bug reports is adequate? > > > > > > Do you feel that making us feel and look like shit helps? > > > > That doesn't answer my question. > > > > See, first we need to work out whether we have a problem. If we do > > this, then we can then have a think about what to do about it. > > > > I tried to convince the 2006 KS attendees that we have a problem and I > > resoundingly failed. People seemed to think that we're doing OK.
We were a minority.
> > But it appears that data such as this contradicts that belief. > > > > This is not a minor matter. If the kernel _is_ slowly deteriorating > > then this won't become readily apparent until it has been happening > > for a number of years. By that stage there will be so much work to do > > to get us back to an acceptable level that it will take a huge effort. > > And it will take a long time after that for the kerel to get its > > reputation back. > > > > So it is important that we catch deterioration *early* if it is > > happening. >
[agree with most of Ingo's moaning]
> (and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds for > all of us. I have one main complaint about networking: the separate > netdev list is a bad idea - networking regressions should be discussed > and fixed on lkml, like most other subsystems are. Any artificial split > of the lk discussion space is bad.)
but here I disagree. LKML is already too busy and noisy. Major subsystems need their own discussion areas.
--- ~Randy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |