lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Server shipments [was Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call]
    This conversation has not only gotten out of hand, it's gotten quite
    silly. People are arguing semantics and relative economic value where a
    few simple assertions should do:

    1) There is a significant interest from developers and users in having
    Linux run efficiently on *small* platforms.
    2) There is a significant interest from developers and users in having
    Linux run efficiently on *large* platforms.
    3) There is disagreement on whether it is possible to accomplish 1 and 2
    simultaneously.
    4) There is disagreement on whether adequate testing is taking place to
    make sure 2 doesn't degrade 1(or vice versa).

    This leads to two choices:
    a) Fork. Obviously to be avoided at all reasonable costs.
    b) Identify reasonable improvements to the testing methodology so that
    any design conflicts are identified immediately instead of gradually
    accumulating and degrading performance over time.

    I vote b(surprise surprise), however, this just changes the debate to
    "what is reasonable testing methodology?" This, however is a debate much
    more worth having than "who ships more of what" and "who said what when".

    Given that a fairly thorough performance testing suite is already in
    place, it would seem to be up to the advocates for the "threatened"
    computing environment (large or small) to convince the "testers that be"
    that certain tests should be added. It is inherently unreasonable to
    expect the developer of a feature/change to be unbiased and neutral with
    respect to that feature, therefore it is unreasonable to expect them to
    prove beyond a reasonable doubt that their feature has no negative
    impact. The best that they can do is convince themselves that the
    feature passes the really deep sniff test. The rest is up to the
    community. The ability of a third party to critique code changes is a
    large part of why the bazaar nature of linux development is so valuable.

    -Tupshin


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:5.044 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site