From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754333AbXD1XKh (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 19:10:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754384AbXD1XKh (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 19:10:37 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:35204 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754281AbXD1XKg (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 19:10:36 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Adrian Bunk Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.21 Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 01:14:36 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Neil Brown , "Martin J. Bligh" , Linus Torvalds , Diego Calleja , Chuck Ebbert , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton References: <20070426040806.GJ3468@stusta.de> <17971.50834.907414.761549@notabene.brown> <20070428223314.GD3468@stusta.de> In-Reply-To: <20070428223314.GD3468@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704290114.38094.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday, 29 April 2007 00:33, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 08:11:30AM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > > On Saturday April 28, mbligh@mbligh.org wrote: > >... > > > As Andrew has pointed out before though - even though he forwards > > > the bugs, nobody does anything with it. The sad truth seems to be > > > that people have very little interest in fixing bugs when they are > > > reported - it's not sexy, I guess. > > > > Not sexy, and also not at all easy. A lot of the interesting bugs > > seem to be subtle interactions between separate parts of the kernel - > > one part making an assumption or exhibiting a behaviour that the other > > part didn't expect. And we all know that writing bug^Wcode is easier > > than removing bugs. I can spend hour and hours reading through code > > trying to get the big picture, and end up finding a one-line change > > that then needs documenting, testing and external review. It's not > > easy. > > > > > I'm still unconvinced the users or the tool are the problem, but if it > > > makes you happier, we can do that. > > > > No, they aren't the problem. Bugs are the problem. But they might be > > a more effective part of the solution. > > > > My perception of the kernel bugzilla is that visibility is very low. > > > > I think there is value in weekly reminders, and I wouldn't mind seeing > > a weekly Email on linux-kernel with something like a list of open bugs > > that have not seen any activity in between 1 and 2 weeks. It might > > get someone out-of-area interested, and might be noticed by someone > > who thinks they are in-area and get them wondering why they didn't > > find out when the bug was first reported. > > The 100 kB email limit has to be lifted for this... > > More seriously, there are > 1000 open bugs in the kernel Bugzilla > without any activity during the last 2 weeks. > > The problem is usually either "Not sexy, and also not at all easy." or > "no maintainer". Please add "limited human resources" to this list. Greetings, Rafael