Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756004Ab0GLXE2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:04:28 -0400 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:42404 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753758Ab0GLXE1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:04:27 -0400 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Message-ID: <4C3B9F56.5090806@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 01:03:50 +0200 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20100627 SeaMonkey/1.1.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Martin Steigerwald CC: Willy Tarreau , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: stable? quality assurance? References: <201007110918.42120.Martin@lichtvoll.de> <201007121744.05844.Martin@lichtvoll.de> <20100712173625.GE6953@1wt.eu> (sfid-20100712_202952_849487_F77B8D03) <201007122156.21725.Martin@lichtvoll.de> In-Reply-To: <201007122156.21725.Martin@lichtvoll.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1973 Lines: 40 Martin Steigerwald wrote: > I think I wait for 2.6.34.2 or .3 and then try again. If it then happens > again, hopefully in a moment where I have nerve to deal with such bugs, I > fire up my second notebook and try to SSH into the machine. If that works I > at least could look into dmesg and X.org logs. netconsole might be required. ... > Is the Linux kernel development really in balance with feature work and > stabilization work? Currently at least from my personal perception it is > not. Development goes that fast - can you all cope with that speed? Maybe > its just time to *slow it down* a bit? If those who added the regressions are found out and asked to debug and fix them, the balance should be corrected and perhaps more precautions being taken in the future. Alas, finding the point in history at which the kernel regressed might take a lot more time than to actually fix it then. In that case, maybe give the author of the bug an estimate of the volunteered hours that were spent on reporting this bug, to put the repercussions into it into perspective. OTOH I suspect a lack of responsibility at the developers is not so much an issue here, more so that the number of people who take the time for -rc tests (not to mention linux-next tests) _and_ to file reports is rather low. Plus, a good bug report often requires experience or good intuition, besides patience and rigor. There were discussions in the past on how more enthusiasts who are willing and able to test prereleases could be attracted. But maybe (just maybe) there are more ways in which the developers themselves could perform more extensive/ more systematic tests. -- Stefan Richter -=====-==-=- -=== -==-= http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- 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/