From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756919AbYEEDEt (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2008 23:04:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753804AbYEEDEj (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2008 23:04:39 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:35768 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751062AbYEEDEi (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2008 23:04:38 -0400 From: Rusty Russell To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 13:04:31 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: David Miller , akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, rjw@sisk.pl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jirislaby@gmail.com References: <20080430131537.1f7a0914.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080430.142137.236846072.davem@davemloft.net> <20080430221936.GA27292@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20080430221936.GA27292@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200805051304.31345.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 01 May 2008 08:19:36 Ingo Molnar wrote: > * David Miller wrote: > > And the people who stick these regressions into the tree need more > > negative reinforcement. > > What we need is not 'negative reinforcement'. Over time as patches succeed more I reduce testing so I can "get things done faster". Eventually I screw up, and get more cautious on checking. It's a dynamic balance. With reduced review comes sloppier code. If we can't increase review, we can at least increase the penalty for screwing up when I do get caught. If vger dropped all my emails for a week after I broke the kernel, I'd be far more careful OR I'd find efficient ways to avoid doing that (like increasing review, or automated testing). Either way, it's a win. But I'm sure everyone else is far more disciplined than I... Rusty.