lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
cc:	Diego Calleja <diegocg@...il.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.21



On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Ponder that, grasshopper. And until you can see that things are not 
> "either-or", "black-and-white", "all or nothing", I don't think I really 
> can have anything worthwhile to add in this discussion to you. People who 
> think in absolutes are simply not worth talking to.

This is another case of "perfect is the enemy of good".

Tryng to reach perfect is not only guaranteed to fail, but trying to reach 
it AND NOT REALIZING that it's stupid and wrong is actually much WORSE 
than just trying to do a reasonable job.

And if you put some _totally_idiotic_ expectation that all bugreports can 
be fixed, and should always be totally blocking, that's guaranteed to just 
cause a totally unusuable bug reporting system.

And your bugzilla arguments seem to be exactly that. A naïve and totally 
unrealistic expectation of "every bugreport is sacred" is BAD.

In other words: perfection not only isn't even possible, BUT IT IS NOT 
EVEN WORTH TRYING TO REACH FOR!

			Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ