Message-Id: <201007111651.42963.Martin@lichtvoll.de>
Date:	Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:51:42 +0200
From:	Martin Steigerwald <Martin@...htvoll.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stable? quality assurance?


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

Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists