From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] SCSI bug fixes for 2.6.15-rc6 Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:23:43 -0600 Message-ID: <1135207423.3533.88.camel@mulgrave> References: <1135205667.3533.79.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat9.steeleye.com ([209.192.50.41]:7312 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964970AbVLUXXz (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:23:55 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , SCSI Mailing List , Linux Kernel On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 15:09 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Hopefully these are the final two bug fixes before 2.6.15 (hint, hurry > > up!). > > Heh. That's a new strategy. Not "ok, we're now as bug-clean as we can be", > but instead the "please please release soon, so that we won't have time to > fix anything else" ;) Well practically, we're never bug free. What happens is that as the tree stabilises, the arrival rate of the critical bugs increases fairly exponentially. I measure this interval to be about 6 days now, so if you release a kernel in the next six days I won't have to run around like a mad thing trying to delay the kernel so I can QA and submit the bug fix, whatever it is. Of course, if you want to wait for all the critical bug fixes, there'll be one in six days ... then twelve days after that ... then twenty four ... James