linux-kernel - Re: stable? quality assurance?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C829F2C.2020808@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Sat, 04 Sep 2010 21:34:04 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	Martin Steigerwald <Martin@...htvoll.de>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stable? quality assurance?

Stefan Richter wrote:
> Process does not do much to prevent bugs or fix bugs.  People do. :-)
> 
> However, you can hardly tell people to implement less features and fix more
> bugs if they don't owe you anything.

PS:  When a tester sunk a lot of time into a bisection or generally into a
good bug report, like you did recently according to your other post, then the
developer of the bug for sure owes you something...  But I am sure that most
developers do appreciate such work a lot.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- =--= --=--
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/