Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754391AbZJYW7k (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:59:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754370AbZJYW7k (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:59:40 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:14065 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754361AbZJYW7j (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:59:39 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=F+2ork+/6IINQ1zRCWzwI4LRtKncTYMXJmlJjL9J4n6Opv5NHal7Xuj/pPtRxDYIjg bvByAb0rL+bNrOYUgN3SqBxl+xOAHYMCWPNoX09g4wW4wVwHJecfO9X2uELL7j55LgW8 SeWtmSBOcgEv+z9sTFMycWRJ7p9KkrEkYJpUI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:59:42 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: RFC: Updating the LKML bug reporting/updating framework From: Robert Bradbury To: LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2536 Lines: 46 I do not know much in these areas having learned my craft by digging UNIX source code listings out of wastebaskets at Harvard (freshman weren't really supposed to have access to the UNIX source code in 1974). And I hardly ever used the Oracle bug reporting system in the mid-1980s. But I have used the Mozilla, Gnome and Gentoo public bug reporting and tracking systems to a fair extent in recent years and they seem to work fairly effectively. They have good search engines. They attach patches to bug reports which fix the stated problems. They allow for discussion, assessment, voting and presumably for the powers in charge the keeping of statistics regarding the state of the software. Now, the LKML seems to to be a throwback almost to 1971 when the first email messages were sent between a couple of PDP-10s. It has patches that I have no interest in, discussions I have no interest in and were it not for Gmail's search function it would be generally useless (very high Noise-to-Signal ratio). Now maybe I do not understand the Linux development process. Maybe this is a "Wizard of Oz" case and there is a hidden bug reporting system hidden behind the curtain -- but in spite of my best efforts I cannot locate it. Why in this day and age (ignoring historical inertia) has Linux failed to adopt a robust (modern) bug reporting system? Can this be fixed? Or is Linux really a case of a "proprietary software" system pretending to be open [1]? Robert Bradbury 1. If a software system is so complex that its quirks and pitfalls cannot easily be located and avoided (witness the ondemand scheduler problem on Pentium IV's message I recently filed) then is it not *effectively* open source. I am qualified to read hardware manuals, I am qualified to rewrite C code (having written code generators for several C compilers) but the LKML is like the windmill and I feel like Don Quixote tilting back and forth in front of it. One could even argue that the lack of an open bug reporting system (and "current state" online reports) effectively makes Linux a non-open-source system. Should not Linux be the one of the first systems to make all knowledge completely available? Or is it doomed to be replaced by systems which might provide such capabilities (Android perhaps???) -- 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/