public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Valette <eric.valette@free.fr>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
Cc: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>,
	marcelo@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.4.22 timeline was RE: 2.4.21-rc7 ACPI broken
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 18:32:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EE8AB18.2060109@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030612160552.770bd15e.skraw@ithnet.com>

Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:15:06 +0200
> Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de> wrote:
> 
> 
>>[...]
>>The important thing is that this is inside a stable kernel series and an 
>>update that makes things better for 100 people but makes things worse 
>>for one person is IMHO bad since it's a regression for one person.
> 
> 
> You cannot fulfill that in reality. Looking at the broad variety of software
> out there you simply cannot know all the implications a simple bug fix may
> have. There may well be boxes that rely on a broken code you just fixed. Only
> god knows. So you sometimes simply have to do "the right thing"(tm) knowing
> there will always be people who shoot you for it.


Just to go a little bit more in that direction, I already have seen an 
obvious one-line patch that caused a deadlock in another OS because due 
to code location change and probably an additionnal cache miss on 
specific part of the code, an existing synchronisation bug that was 
never triggered started to effectively happen...

Besides, if you please 1000 users and cause problem to 2 of them because 
they have broken hardware, I think you are going into the right direction.

 >The important sections are more likely (ordered by priority):
 > - bug fixes (e.g. aic7xxx)
 > - support for additional hardware (e.g. ACPI update)
 > - new features (e.g. XFS)


Bug fixes are meant to make the 2.4 kernel more useable right? So I do 
not reallly see the utimate difference with other things in your 
category. What I was asking is a rationnal way of chosing the 
priorities. You gave me yours without real explanation.

The purpose of the original mail was to ask for discussion/clarification 
on 2.4 development priorities (e.g something like the 2.6 todo list) and 
a proposal to set up the priorities using generic targetted hardware 
(server, laptop, desktop) as hint for requirement selection.

-- 
    __
   /  `                   	Eric Valette
  /--   __  o _.          	6 rue Paul Le Flem
(___, / (_(_(__         	35740 Pace

Tel: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76	Fax: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76
E-mail: eric.valette@free.fr


  reply	other threads:[~2003-06-12 16:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-06-10 23:40 2.4.22 timeline was RE: 2.4.21-rc7 ACPI broken Eric Valette
2003-06-11 21:15 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-06-12 11:47   ` Eric Valette
2003-06-12 14:05   ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2003-06-12 16:32     ` Eric Valette [this message]
2003-06-17 23:25 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2003-06-17 23:58   ` J.A. Magallon
2003-06-18 20:27     ` Marcelo Tosatti
2003-06-18  5:15   ` Anders Karlsson
2003-06-18 16:55     ` Bill Nottingham
2003-06-18  9:04   ` Eric Valette
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-06-09 23:27 Grover, Andrew
2003-06-09 22:38 Margit Schubert-While
2003-06-10  0:08 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2003-06-09 21:47 Margit Schubert-While
2003-06-09 21:21 Grover, Andrew
2003-06-09 21:24 ` Grzegorz Jaskiewicz
2003-06-09 22:03 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2003-06-10  0:44   ` Alan Cox
2003-06-10 11:05     ` Torben Mathiasen
2003-06-10 15:14     ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2003-06-09 21:07 Margit Schubert-While
2003-06-04 20:49 Grover, Andrew
2003-06-09 20:32 ` 2.4.22 timeline was " Marcelo Tosatti
2003-06-10  0:47   ` Alan Cox

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3EE8AB18.2060109@free.fr \
    --to=eric.valette@free.fr \
    --cc=bunk@fs.tum.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcelo@conectiva.com.br \
    --cc=skraw@ithnet.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox