From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: Regression tracking
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 15:07:07 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <20120122.150707.1411449164435920150.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <201201222031.51116.maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
	<20120122.143728.1710688129934394279.davem@davemloft.net>
	<201201222052.02135.maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: davej@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl
To: maciej.rutecki@gmail.com
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <201201222052.02135.maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

From: Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 20:52:02 +0100

> OK. But tracking regressions in two (or more) places is nonsense. And this 
> puts into question all of my current work, such as how to analyze 
> (automatically) the progress of the whole kernel and its quality per each -rc. 
> Problem to discussion, but if everyone will do as you wish, it will all work 
> went to waste.

If someone else wants to maintain the state of bugs on some web
site and click buttons all day long, that is their perogative.

But it's not something I'm going to do.

You can't force people to use tools, and frankly that's the end of
this conversation as far as I'm concerned.