Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755516Ab1DFJw1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Apr 2011 05:52:27 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49430 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755304Ab1DFJw0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Apr 2011 05:52:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 12:51:44 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Avi Kivity , Anthony Liguori , Pekka Enberg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aarcange@redhat.com, mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, joro@8bytes.org, penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, asias.hejun@gmail.com, gorcunov@gmail.com Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native Linux KVM tool Message-ID: <20110406095144.GF25626@redhat.com> References: <1301592656.586.15.camel@jaguar> <4D982E89.8070502@redhat.com> <4D9847BC.9060906@redhat.com> <4D98716D.9040307@codemonkey.ws> <4D9873CD.3080207@redhat.com> <20110406093333.GB6465@elte.hu> <20110406093635.GE25626@redhat.com> <20110406094612.GA19943@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110406094612.GA19943@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1521 Lines: 35 On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 11:46:12AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 11:33:33AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > So no, your kind of cynical, defeatist sentiment about code quality is by > > > no means true in my experience. Projects become ugly gooballs once > > > maintainers stop caring enough. > > > > In case of Qemu it was other way around. Maintainers started caring too late. > > Nah, i do not think it's ever too late to care. > > Example: arch/i386 - arch/x86_64/ was very messy for many, many years and we > turned it around and can be proud of arch/x86/ today - but i guess i'm somewhat > biased there ;-) > > In my experience it's entirely possible to turn a messy gooball into something > you can be proud of - it's all reversible. Start small, with the core bits you > care about most - then extend those concepts to other areas of the code base, > gradually. There might be subsystems that will never turn around before > becoming obsolete - that's not a big problem. > I do not disagree, but then qemu has a chance because maintainers do care now, but not about all bits. And there should be willingness to drop bits nobody cares about and I do not see this yet. -- Gleb. -- 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/