Re: [RFC] looking for feedback on stable RT patch process

[Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@am.sony.com>]

Hi All,

I left the word "stable" out of "stable RT release" in questions 5 and 6
by mistake.  Here are the questions again, but with "stable" included:


Hi All,

I'm going to be giving a presentation at Plumbers on the RT stable
patch process and I would like for it to reflect more than just
my personal experiences and biases.  If you have opinions and
experiences, please email me directly (please do not reply
to the list - I will send a summary to the list after Plumbers).

If you have any additional questions that you think would be
interesting, please post them to the list as a reply to this message.

Please answer any or all of the following questions:

 1) Have you downloaded any stable RT releases?  If so, approximately how many?
    If not, why not?

 2) How do you use the stable RT release?  To run on a single system?  To place
    on a product that is sold / lent / given away?  To create a distribution?
    Other?

 3) Is the stable RT release useful and valuable?  (How many beers do we owe
    to Steve when we run into him at conferences?)  Why is it useful and
    valuable?

 4) If the stable RT release is not useful, why isn't it?

 5) What changes would make the stable RT release more useful?  Why would the
    changes make it more useful?

 6) What changes would make the stable RT release better?

 7) What should _not_ change about the stable RT release?

 8) How frequently do you test a stable RT release (percent of releases)?

 9) How intensively do you test a stable RT release?  Boot?  Functional test?
    Performance test(s)?  Other test(s)?  Single target (type of computer)?
    Multiple targets?  How many different types of targets?

10) Which series have been useful?  Which series is currently most useful (can
    be more than one)?  (3.0.x, 3.2.x, 3.4.x)

11) Any other random or useful comments or opinions?


Thanks for any and all input!

-Frank