On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Matt Mackall wrote:
>
> Unfortunately the particular patch from Olaf is presumably covering up
> another bug that other people (including Olaf) had hit. So reverting
> it is going to introduce a different regression.
It's not a regression, it's an old problem.
And the rule is: machines that _used_ to work are more important. That
rule got hewn into stone when the ACPI layer changes constantly kept
breaking things that used to work, while "fixing" other things.
So we don't fix bugs by introducing new problems. That way lies madness,
and nobody ever knows if you actually make any real progress at all. Is it
two steps forwards, one step back, or one step forward and two steps back?
Different people will give different answers.
That's why regressions are _so_ much more important than new bugfixes.
Because it's much more important to make slow but _steady_ progress, and
have people know things improve (or at least not "deprove"). We don't want
any kind of "brownian motion development".
Linus
-
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]
