Re: My thoughts on the "new development model"

michael_at_optusnet.com.au
Date: 10/29/04

  • Next message: Adrian Bunk: "[2.6 patch] OSS: remove unused functions" 
    To: John Richard Moser <nigelenki@comcast.net>
Date:	29 Oct 2004 09:19:05 +1000

    John Richard Moser <nigelenki@comcast.net> writes:
    > michael@optusnet.com.au wrote:
    [...]
    > | There seems to be a lot of strange notions on this concept of 'stable'.
    > | The only thing that makes a kernel 'stable' is time. Not endless
    > | bugfixes. Just time. The idea of stable software is software that not
    > | going to give you any suprises, software that you can trust.
    > |
    >
    > Right. Bugfixing the "Stable" branch ONLY will make sure it does not
    > surprise you with sudden new features (which may surprise you by. . .
    > breaking your own patches!).

    You've missed the point. 'Bugfixing' introduces code changes, and new
    bugs. Having made 'bugfix', you now need to go back and re-do much,
    if not all of your testing to ensure that you haven't introduced a brand
    new bug. At a simple level, to 'bugfix' means to remove 1 known bug
    and introduce a random number of unknown bugs. (Could be zero with reasonable
    probability; could be 50 with low probabilty. The point is that you don't
    know).

    This isn't helping to reduce your 'suprise' rate.

    [...]
    > | Now you've got a kernel that tests clean with your app. DON'T
    > | CHANGE IT!!
    > |
    > | Ta-Dah! You've got a stable kernel.
    > |
    >
    > That if I keep my realtime patches or my security enhancements or my new
    > drivers or my new filesystems on and don't continuously upgrade will
    > cause me to stagnate and be left behind and ignored.

    Ahh. Now I get it. You don't want a stable kernel at all. You
    just want to pick and chose which new features you get.

    In what way is 'security enchancements', or 'new drivers', or 'new
    filesystems' not the very feature enchancements you're complaining
    about in 2.6?

    Michael.
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  • Next message: Adrian Bunk: "[2.6 patch] OSS: remove unused functions"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: FAangband 0.3.0
      ... Bugfixed versions of FAangband 0.3.0 (source and windows port) are now available ... Bugs not fixed include dodgy bonus updates (ctrl-R to refresh the screen if you ... I'll do another bugfix. ...
      (rec.games.roguelike.angband)
    • Re: Has anyone ever wished for a fixed version of Access rather than a new and improved version?
      ... Your bugfix is not my bugfix. ... I'm sure Access has bugs that everyone can agree on, ... that for whatever reason MSFT just never seems to find enough reason ... >A97 works beautifully. ...
      (comp.databases.ms-access)
    • Re: ANN: madExcept 2.7h
      ... > Is there any reason to favour 2.7h over v3? ... > just as a bugfix for customers who haven't upgraded ... it does contain new bugs, I already got some reports in). ...
      (borland.public.delphi.thirdpartytools.general)
    • ANN: Gtk2::Ex::DBI-0.4
      ... This is mainly a bugfix release ... ... - Fixed 2 *nasty* bugs in apply method that were preventing the ... Dan ...
      (perl.dbi.users)
    • Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [OOPS, usbcore, releaseintf] 2.6.0-test10-mm1
      ... David Brownell wrote: ... seems a bugfix is in order. ... It chould be fixed, perhaps the change ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)