From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757834Ab2CWKOk (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2012 06:14:40 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:46818 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753138Ab2CWKOj (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2012 06:14:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:14:31 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Maciej Rutecki Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , florian@mickler.org Subject: Re: Tracking regressions for next release(s) Message-ID: <20120323101431.GA8832@liondog.tnic> Mail-Followup-To: Borislav Petkov , Maciej Rutecki , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , florian@mickler.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 07:01:19AM +0100, Maciej Rutecki wrote: > I am interested in the opinion of the developers, testers, and > everyone involved in the development of the kernel, if they thing that > tracking regressions and monitoring the quality makes sense, Absolutely. > especially since I met several times (put it mildly) dislike of such > work and the bugs are repaired relatively slowly. I can imagine people getting cranky when someone points out that there's a "boring" bug they need to fix instead of them working on the cool new feature they have thought of. It is the same old story we've been having since forever: people don't really love to fix bugs, especially if the code works for them and the bug doesn't appear on their boxes. > Perhaps someone has comments or proposals for change (in the way of > work or me). Yeah, we need a big bad assh*le :) who screams at everyone until their bugs is fixed. But serioulsy, this hasn't changed: we definitely need a regression list, I think it works even better when Linus goes over it and says this is fixed, that is this commit, etc. because he pulls all the trees in the end, ... so yeah, I think what you guys are doing is good and important. It would be even cooler if this list be expanded also to regressions in kernel performance which people have noticed from running benchmarks on different -rcs and have noticed differences there, maybe a website (not bugzilla) which lists all those regressions for interested parties to fix in addition to the LKML mails..., etc... Thanks for your hard work, btw. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris.