Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759152AbXH3Iv0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 04:51:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755941AbXH3IvT (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 04:51:19 -0400 Received: from mailout.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:43448 "EHLO mailhub.stusta.mhn.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755930AbXH3IvS (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 04:51:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 10:51:19 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Natalie Protasevich Cc: David Rees , Daniel Walker , Michal Piotrowski , Andrew Morton , =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJu?= Steinbrink , eranian@hpl.hp.com, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21) Message-ID: <20070830085118.GB9260@stusta.de> References: <46D21E8E.4000003@googlemail.com> <20070827005131.b93f5935.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <6bffcb0e0708270438j4c92a0b4m1396b4010f25bfb5@mail.gmail.com> <1188227585.2435.192.camel@dhcp193.mvista.com> <6bffcb0e0708270826p7a7fb044re53d0db4094bc3d5@mail.gmail.com> <1188229197.2435.207.camel@dhcp193.mvista.com> <72dbd3150708271212w6bcca4c4web26d7cb25892afc@mail.gmail.com> <32209efe0708290042g362fbfadj38fe57e0de7f3af@mail.gmail.com> <20070829222344.GV26410@stusta.de> <32209efe0708291659w1f75adbcrf72e61a9325903da@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <32209efe0708291659w1f75adbcrf72e61a9325903da@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3594 Lines: 83 On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 04:59:47PM -0700, Natalie Protasevich wrote: > > Bugzilla is for tracking bugs, not for discussing possible > > kernel features. > > True, but some of them are categorized as bugs from the reporter's > prospective, when they say "man page says" or "according to POSIX it's > wrong". If code behaves differently from how it should that is a bug. [1] > I am going to push ones that are feature suggestions, > re-design suggestions, and some way implementation related out to the > site that Rick is going to help to maintain, which is more of > suggested projects list. > > > Tracking feature or implementation suggestions wouldn't make sense. > > Consider e.g. that there are several people on linux-kernel who often > > write what they think the kernel should do but who never write a single > > line of code themselves. There's no value in tracking such stuff. > > Yes, but some suggestions seem to make sense. How about evaluating it? > and if they are real making it a possible project for someone who > would do appropriate research, etc. And we move them from bugzilla > where they don't belong to a development arena. Fine with me, my point was simply that they don't belong into a _bug_ tracker. > > > improved searches - for sure, for example in addition to > > > pre-cooked queries make possible using "raw" queries directly on sql, > > > which will address misplaced bugs and will make categories more > > > dynamic; > > > > What do you have in mind? > > I am going to look into the bugzilla software to start with, and see > if there is a way to expand it this way. we used to have such internal > tracking (unix based) at work, where we could compose pretty much > freelance queries, it is really not big deal for developers who script > and write huge regular expressions for their convenience every > day...just a vogue idea for now, trying to think how to minimize bugs > that get lost because of wrong bucket. Going manually through all of > them is not very effective. Is there any reasonable query that would be possible through SQL but isn't already possible through the web interface? > > I've always been able to do any search I wanted using the "Advanced Search" > > of Bugzilla. Well, just checking, it seems the search for the new > > "regression" flag could be made easier, but that's not a general problem. > > Yes but you have to assume that everything is in the right place from > start, besides putting things into categories is often impossible > before some exchange with reporter and initial diagnostics. The worst > category so fas as I found is "other" (in every place where it > exists). Most of the "other" bugs haven't been touched, and some have > huge "SATA" letters in the description written in them :) >... You need some kind of first level support that does some initial debugging and assigns the bug into the right category, and that will always be a manual task done by going through all new bugs. > --Natalie cu Adrian [1] there are special cases where the kernel might deliberately not some specification -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/