Re: A proposal; making 2.6.20 a bugfix only version.

[Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu]

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 07:15:49 +0300, Al Boldi said:
> I don't think there is a lack of heuristics, nor is there a lack of 
> discussion.  What is needed, is a realization of the problem.
> 
> IOW, respective tree-owners need to come to a realization of the state of 
> their trees, problem or not.  If it has a problem, that problem needs to be 
> fixed or backed out of stable and moved into dev.

I keep trying to parse this, and it keeps coming up as "content-free".

For starters, you don't even have a useful definition of "has a problem".
There's a whole *range* of definitions for that, and even skilled and
respected members of the Linux kernel community can disagree about whether
something is "a problem".  For example, see the thread about a week ago
about "Remove hotplug cpu crap from cpufreq".

If, given a *specific* feature with high wart quotient, we can't agree on
whether it needs to be fixed or backed out, we're doomed to fail if we
start handwaving about problems "in general".  As a group, we suck at
anything that isn't specific, like "Algorithm A is better than B for
case XYZ".

Attachment: pgpitvtmEAdCa.pgp
Description: PGP signature