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

["Horst H. von Brand" <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl>]

Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/11/06, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > There's no shortage of issues that need fixing, but since we keep
> > > merging new stuff, a lot of bugfixing energy gets spend on the new
> > > cool stuff instead of fixing up any other issues we have.
> >
> > but if you do this you just end up with a bigger backlog so that the
> > next one will even be more unstable due to a extreme high change rate.

> Only if people continue to work on new stuff during the "bug fixing only"
> cycle.  If we manage to get everyone focused on bug fixing only for the
> entire cycle the backlog won't be growing (much).

Sorry, won't work. People working on shiny new toys will just put off
sending in their patches for a cycle, and the usual bugfixers will likewise
just go on doing their stuff.

> > > Coverity has, as of this writing, identified 728 issues in the current
> > > kernel. Sure, some of those have already been identified as false or
> > > ignorable issues, but many are flagged as actual bugs and still more
> > > are as yet uninspected.

> > most are mostly false. And the rest is getting looked at. What's the
> > problem?

> Yes, MANY are false, and I know the rest are getting worked at, I work on
> some myself when time permits.  I mentioned it simply as an indicator
> (one amongst many) that we have a lot of known unfixed issues.

OK, lead by example: Do put off new work and work just on fixing things for
a while. Collect bug reports and make them useful for would-be-fixers. Etc.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                    Fono: +56 32 2654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria             +56 32 2654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile               Fax:  +56 32 2797513