Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! | Date | Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:47:12 +0200 |
| |
On Wednesday, 30 of April 2008, David Miller wrote: > From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:54:05 -0700 > > > linux-next does little to address our two largest (IMO) problems: > > inadequate review and inadequate response to bug and regression reports. > > But those problems are harder to fix.. > > This is all about positive and negative reinforcement. > > The people who sit and git bisect their lives away to get the > regressions fixed need more positive reinforcement. And the people > who stick these regressions into the tree need more negative > reinforcement. > > The current way of dealing with folks who stick broken crud into the > tree results in zero change in behvaior. > > People who insert the bum changes into the tree only really have one > core thing that they are sensitive to, their reputation. That's why > there is an enormous reluctance to even suggest reverts, it looks bad > for them and it also makes more work for them in the end. > > I guess what these folks are truly afraid of is that someone will > start tracking reverts and post their results in some presentation > at some big conference. I say that would be a good thing. To > be honest, hitting the revert button more aggressively and putting > the fear of being the "revert king" into everyone's minds might > really help with this problem.
Well, probably ...
> Currently there is no sufficient negative pushback on people who > insert broken crud into the tree. So it should be no surprise that it > continues.
... but that should also point at the trees through which the bugs are introduced.
I mean, the maintainers should be more careful for what they take to their trees and push upstream. If that happens, they'll (hopefully) put some more pressure on patch submitters.
| |