Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 May 2008 17:35:20 +0200 | From | Takashi Iwai <> | Subject | Re: Number of bugs - statistics |
| |
At Fri, 23 May 2008 13:35:03 +0300, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > > Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 09:20:46AM -0700, Natalie Protasevich wrote: > > > >> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote: > >> > >>> Andrew sees and handles the majority of incoming bug reports. > >>> Ask him whether he agress with this. > >>> > >>> And ALSA alone has 2000 open bug reports, which makes the open ACPI or > >>> SCSI bug numbers relatively irrelevant in any "number of bugs" > >>> statistics. > >>> > >>> > > Not everyone uses Bugzilla (e.g. ALSA uses Mantis). > > > > And the majority of bug reports might still go only to mailing lists and > > not into any bugtracker at all. As long as this happens the data is > > simply not available. > > > > > >> by various criteria: ALSA bugs > >> are numerous, which is not important for most enterprise server users > >> who would completely disregard this category, whereas desktop users > >> will probably concentrate on those more than any other. > >> > > > > > Although ALSA might have a lot of bug reports. Any bugs that affect > kernel stability are fixed quickly. > The rest of the ALSA bugs are more along the lines of "This feature on > this particular sound card variant does not seem to work". This > generally implies un-implemented features that uses now want. Some times > the fix is simply adding that variant to the quirks list and finding out > which quirk should be applied. > So, once one removes the "un-implemented features" category from the > ALSA bug list, one would expect the remaining number to be low.
... and a normal screening would reduce the amount of bugs to 1/4, I guess. But, we have a serious problem regarding man power in this area, unfortunately.
Takashi
| |