[email protected] wrote:
> 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".
Think denial.
> 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".
We don't need to agree whether A is better than B, the mere fact that we
acknowledge the problem is the first step in finding a solution.
So, either fix it, or back out.
OTOH, if there is no problem, then I guess we have blue skies...
Thanks!
--
Al
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
