From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161309AbXD1WdG (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:33:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161366AbXD1WdG (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:33:06 -0400 Received: from mailout.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:37624 "EHLO mailhub.stusta.mhn.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161309AbXD1WdE (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:33:04 -0400 Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 00:33:14 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Neil Brown Cc: "Martin J. Bligh" , Linus Torvalds , Diego Calleja , Chuck Ebbert , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.21 Message-ID: <20070428223314.GD3468@stusta.de> References: <20070426040806.GJ3468@stusta.de> <20070426125802.GL3468@stusta.de> <4630DB24.4030005@redhat.com> <20070426201325.8a1ebda3.diegocg@gmail.com> <20070426224148.69b91b2e.diegocg@gmail.com> <46339BC7.6050802@mbligh.org> <17971.50834.907414.761549@notabene.brown> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17971.50834.907414.761549@notabene.brown> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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". Technology can assist, but there are non-technical problems you can't solve through technology. > NeilBrown cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed