Re: stable? quality assurance?

Martin Steigerwald
2010-07-11T14:51:47Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 3155 bytes --]

Hi Lee,

Am Sonntag 11 Juli 2010 schrieb Lee Mathers:
> Wow!
>
> First question what is a "desaster"?

For me freezing the machine or at least complete desktop randomly for
example. And actually I said "for me" as you can reread on the bottom of
your top posting.

> Second question, what makes you so important that you feel you can
> makes demands and comments as you did.

Since when I do need to be considered to be important by you or anyone
else to make comments? Actually I think I do not - this is still an open
mailinglist, isn't it? And I won't waste my time with proofs that I
contributed to free software here and there - also to kernel testing what
for example Ingo Molnar could testify back in early CFS times where I
roughly compiled a kernel a day and to kernel documentation once.

I also do not get why you are attacking me personally. It seems to be that
you feel personally attacked by me. But I did not. I just questioned the
quality of the kernel and its current quality assurance process. No one is
personally bad then anything of that lacks.

One reason for a demand for me is best expressed by this question: Does
the kernel developer community want to encourage that a group of advanced
Linux users - but mostly non-developers - compile their own vanilla or
valnilla near kernels, provide wider testing and report a bug now and
then?

I can live with either answer. If not, I just will be much more reluctant
to try out new kernels.

But I have experienced working productively with kernel developers like
Ingo and tuxonice developer Nigel who where pretty interested in my usage
of latest kernels.

I admit my wording could have been friendlier, too, but I was just
frustrated out of my recent experiences. What I wanted to achieve is
raising concern whether kernel quality actually has decreased and more
importantly something needs to be done to make it more stable again.

Well Linus has at least been a bit more reluctant to take big changes
after rc1 this cycle, so maybe 2.6.35 will be better again.

> If indeed these are production systems and you are an administrator of
> said production systems. I suggest you need to do a little more home
> work to expand your knowledge base.

Its production system that have some fault tolerance, i.e. not servers,
but laptops and one, not yet all workstations. But for me a certain
balance has to be met. I will just downgrade and drop newer kernels or
even start skipping whole major versions completely on a regular basis if
that turns out to be the only way to have stable enough machines for me.
One approach would be to stick to the stable kernels that Greg and the
stable team maintains for a longer time

> Hope you have better luck in getting your systems running well.

Thanks. I certainly will. If need be by downgrading.

I hope that someone answers who actually can take some critique. From the
current replies I perceive a lack of that ability.

Ciao,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]